The predictive validity of the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire in preschool age to identify mental disorders in preadolescence

The Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ) is a brief, widely used instrument to screen for mental health problems in children and adolescents. The SDQ predictive algorithms developed for the SDQ, synthesize information from multiple informants regarding psychiatric symptoms and their impact on daily life. This study aimed to explore the validity of the SDQ predictive algorithms used in preschool age to predict mental disorders in preadolescence. The study population comprises 1176 children from the Copenhagen Child Cohort 2000 (CCC2000) assessed at age 5-7 years by the SDQ and reassessed at 11-12 years with the Development and Well Being Assessment (DAWBA) for evaluation of ICD-10 mental disorders. Odds Ratios (ORs), sensitivities, specificities, positive predictive values (PPVs) and negative predictive values (NPVs) were calculated for the SDQ predictive algorithms regarding ICD-10 diagnoses of hyperkinetic-inattentive-, behavioural- and emotional disorders. Significant ORs ranging from 2.3-36.5 were found for the SDQ predictive algorithms in relation to the corresponding diagnoses. The highest ORs were found for hyperkinetic and inattentive disorders, and the lowest for emotional disorders. Sensitivities ranging from 4.5-47.4, specificities ranging from 83.0-99.5, PPVs ranging from 5.0-45.5 and NPVs ranging from 90.6-99.0 were found for the SDQ predictive algorithms in relation to the diagnoses. The results support that the SDQ predictive algorithms are useful for screening at preschool-age to identify children at an increased risk of mental disorders in preadolescence. However, early screening with the SDQ predictive algorithms cannot stand alone, and repeated assessments of children are needed to identify, especially internalizing, mental health problems

Effects of Anacetrapib in Patients with Atherosclerotic Vascular Disease

BACKGROUND: Patients with atherosclerotic vascular disease remain at high risk for cardiovascular events despite effective statin-based treatment of low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol levels. The inhibition of cholesteryl ester transfer protein (CETP) by anacetrapib reduces LDL cholesterol levels and increases high-density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol levels. However, trials of other CETP inhibitors have shown neutral or adverse effects on cardiovascular outcomes. METHODS: We conducted a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial involving 30,449 adults with atherosclerotic vascular disease who were receiving intensive atorvastatin therapy and who had a mean LDL cholesterol level of 61 mg per deciliter (1.58 mmol per liter), a mean non-HDL cholesterol level of 92 mg per deciliter (2.38 mmol per liter), and a mean HDL cholesterol level of 40 mg per deciliter (1.03 mmol per liter). The patients were assigned to receive either 100 mg of anacetrapib once daily (15,225 patients) or matching placebo (15,224 patients). The primary outcome was the first major coronary event, a composite of coronary death, myocardial infarction, or coronary revascularization. RESULTS: During the median follow-up period of 4.1 years, the primary outcome occurred in significantly fewer patients in the anacetrapib group than in the placebo group (1640 of 15,225 patients [10.8%] vs. 1803 of 15,224 patients [11.8%]; rate ratio, 0.91; 95% confidence interval, 0.85 to 0.97; P=0.004). The relative difference in risk was similar across multiple prespecified subgroups. At the trial midpoint, the mean level of HDL cholesterol was higher by 43 mg per deciliter (1.12 mmol per liter) in the anacetrapib group than in the placebo group (a relative difference of 104%), and the mean level of non-HDL cholesterol was lower by 17 mg per deciliter (0.44 mmol per liter), a relative difference of -18%. There were no significant between-group differences in the risk of death, cancer, or other serious adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with atherosclerotic vascular disease who were receiving intensive statin therapy, the use of anacetrapib resulted in a lower incidence of major coronary events than the use of placebo. (Funded by Merck and others; Current Controlled Trials number, ISRCTN48678192 ; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01252953 ; and EudraCT number, 2010-023467-18 .)

Examination of gaze behaviour in social anxiety disorder using a virtual reality eye-tracking paradigm: protocol for a case–control study

Introduction Social anxiety disorder (SAD) has an early onset, a high lifetime prevalence, and may be a risk factor for developing other mental disorders. Gaze behaviour is considered an aberrant feature of SAD. Eye-tracking, a novel technology device, enables recording eye movements in real time, making it a direct and objective measure of gaze behaviour. Virtual reality (VR) is a promising tool for assessment and diagnostic purposes. Developing an objective screening tool based on examination of gaze behaviour in SAD may potentially aid early detection. The objective of this current study is, therefore to examine gaze behaviour in SAD utilising VR.Methods and analysis A case–control study design is employed in which a clinical sample of 29 individuals with SAD will be compared with a matched healthy control group of 29 individuals. In the VR-based eye-tracking paradigm, participants will be presented to stimuli consisting of high-res 360° 3D stereoscopic videos of three social-evaluative tasks designed to elicit social anxiety. The study will investigate between-group gaze behaviour differences during stimuli presentation.Ethics and dissemination The study has been approved by the National Committee on Health Research Ethics for the Capital Region of Denmark (H-22041443). The study has been preregistered on OSF registries: https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/XCTAKAll participants will be provided with written and oral information. Informed consent is required for all the participants. Participation is voluntarily, and the participants can at any time terminate their participation without any consequences. Study results; positive, negative or inconclusive will be published in relevant scientific journals