Global impression of perceived difficulties in children and adolescents with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder: Reliability and validity of a new instrument assessing perceived difficulties from a patient, parent and physician perspective over the day

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>The objective of this analysis was to evaluate the psychometric properties of a brief scale developed to assess the degree of difficulties in children with Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD). The Global Impression of Perceived Difficulties (GIPD) scale reflects overall impairment, psychosocial functioning and Quality of Life (QoL) as rated by patient, parents and physician at various times of the day.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>In two open-label studies, ADHD-patients aged 6–17 years were treated with atomoxetine (target-dose 0.5–1.2 mg/kg/day). ADHD-related difficulties were assessed up to week 24 using the GIPD. Data from both studies were combined to validate the scale.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Overall, 421 patients received atomoxetine. GIPD scores improved over time. All three GIPD-versions (patient, parent, physician) were internally consistent; all items showed at least moderate item-total correlation. The scale showed good test-retest reliability over a two-week period from all three perspectives. Good convergent and discriminant validity was shown.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>GIPD is an internally consistent, reliable and valid measure to assess difficulties in children with ADHD at various times of the day and can be used as indicator for psychosocial impairment and QoL. The scale is sensitive to treatment-related change.</p

International comparisons of behavioral and emotional problems in preschool children: parents’ reports from 24 societies

International comparisons were conducted of preschool children’s behavioral and emotional problems as reported on the Child Behavior Checklist for Ages 1½–5 by parents in 24 societies (N¼19,850). Item ratings were aggregated into scores on syndromes; Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders–oriented scales; a Stress Problems scale; and Internalizing, Externalizing, and Total Problems scales. Effect sizes for scale score differences among the 24 societies ranged from small to medium (3–12%). Although societies differed greatly in language, culture, and other characteristics, Total Problems scores for 18 of the 24 societies were within 7.1 points of the omnicultural mean of 33.3 (on a scale of 0–198). Gender and age differences, as well as gender and age interactions with society, were all very small (effect sizes<1%). Across all pairs of societies, correlations between mean item ratings averaged .78, and correlations between internal consistency alphas for the scales averaged .92, indicating that the rank orders of mean item ratings and internal consistencies of scales were very similar across diverse societies

The CBCL/1½–5’s DSM-ASD Scale: Confirmatory Factor Analyses Across 24 Societies

Previous research supports the CBCL/1½–5’s DSM-ASD scale (and its precursor, the DSM-PDP scale) as a Level 1 ASD screener. Confirmatory factor analyses (CFAs) with data from population samples in 24 societies (N = 19,850) indicated good measurement invariance across societies, especially for configural and metric invariance. Items 4. 25, 67, 80, and 98 may be especially good discriminators of ASD because they have tend to have low base rates, strong loadings on the ASD latent construct, and the best measurement invariance across societies. Further research is needed to test the discriminative power of these items in predicting ASD, but our strong measurement findings support the international psychometric robustness of the CBCL/1½–5’s DSM-ASD scale