SDQ bruikbaar voor jongeren tot achttien jaar:Scores nog beter benutten met 'SDQ-profiel'

In Dutch Preventive Child Healthcare (Jeugdgezondheidszorg), the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ) is used to identify adolescents with psychosocial problems. Research shows that the SDQ, especially the parent-reported version, is useful among 12- to 17-year-olds

Comparing three short questionnaires to detect psychosocial problems among 3 to 4-year olds

Background: Validated questionnaires help community pediatric services to identify psychosocial problems. Our aim was to assess which of three short questionnaires was most suitable for this identification among pre-school children. Methods: We included 1,650 children (response 64 %) aged 3-4 years undergoing routine well-child health assessments in 18 services across the Netherlands. Child healthcare professionals (CHPs) interviewed and examined children and parents. Parents were randomized regarding filling out the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ) or the KIPPPI, a Dutch-origin questionnaire. In addition, all filled out the Ages and Stages Questionnaires: Social-Emotional (ASQ:SE) and the Child Behavior Checklist (CBCL). We assessed the internal consistency and validity of each questionnaire, with CBCL and treatment status as criteria, and the degree to which each questionnaire could improve identification based solely on clinical assessment. Results: The internal consistency of the total problems scale of each questionnaire was satisfactory, Cronbach's alphas varied between 0.75 and 0.98. Only the SDQ discriminated sufficiently between children with and without problems as measured by the CBCL (sensitivity = 0.76 at a cut-off point with specificity = 0.90), in contrast to the other two questionnaires (with sensitivity indices varying between 0.51-0.63). Similar results were found for the treatment status criterion, although sensitivity was lower for all questionnaires. The SDQ seemed to add most to the identification of psychosocial problems by CHPs, but the differences between the SDQ and the ASQ: SE were not statistically significant. Conclusions: The SDQ is the best tool for the identification of psychosocial problems in pre-school children by community paediatric services

The Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire Parent Form:Dutch norms and validity

OBJECTIVE: This study provides Dutch national norms for the parent-reported Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ) for children aged 3-14 years, and assesses the test performance of the SDQ Total Difficulties Scale (TDS) and impairment Scale. We further compared Dutch SDQ norms with those of the United Kingdom (UK), to determine potential variation in country-specific norms. STUDY DESIGN: We analyzed data of 3384 children aged 3 to 14 years. The data were obtained in schools, and in the context of Preventive Child Healthcare. Parents completed the SDQ parent form and the Child Behavior Checklist (CBCL). We determined clinical (10% elevated scores) and borderline (20% elevated scores) SDQ TDS norms. We assessed the test performance (validity) of the SDQ TDS and Impairment Score using the CBCL as criterion. RESULTS: The clinical SDQ TDS norms varied between > 10 and > 14 depending on the age group. The SDQ TDS discriminated between children with and without problems, as measured by the CBCL, for all age groups (AUCs varied from 0.92 to 0.96). The SDQ Impairment Score had added value (beyond the SDQ TDS) only for the age group 12-14 years. For the Netherlands we found lower clinical SDQ TDS norms than those previously reported for the UK (i.e. > 16). CONCLUSION: The clinical SDQ TDS norms varied between > 10 and > 14 depending on the age groups. We found good test performance at these proposed norms. Dutch norms differed somewhat from UK norms. In the Netherlands, the SDQ performed better with Dutch-specific norms than with UK-specific norms

Computerized adaptive testing to screen children for emotional and behavioral problems by preventive child healthcare

BACKGROUND: Questionnaires to detect emotional and behavioral problems (EBP) in Preventive Child Healthcare (PCH) should be short which potentially affects validity and reliability. Simulation studies have shown that Computerized Adaptive Testing (CAT) could overcome these weaknesses. We studied the applicability (using the measures participation rate, satisfaction, and efficiency) and the validity of CAT in routine PCH practice. METHODS: We analyzed data on 461 children aged 10-11 years (response 41%), who were assessed during routine well-child examinations by PCH professionals. Before the visit, parents completed the CAT and the Child Behavior Checklist (CBCL). Satisfaction was measured by parent- and PCH professional-report. Efficiency of the CAT procedure was measured as number of items needed to assess whether a child has serious problems or not. Its validity was assessed using the CBCL as the criterion. RESULTS: Parents and PCH professionals rated the CAT on average as good. The procedure required at average 16 items to assess whether a child has serious problems or not. Agreement of scores on the CAT scales with corresponding CBCL scales was high (range of Spearman correlations 0.59-0.72). Area Under Curves (AUC) were high (range: 0.95-0.97) for the Psycat total, externalizing, and hyperactivity scales using corresponding CBCL scale scores as criterion. For the Psycat internalizing scale the AUC was somewhat lower but still high (0.86). CONCLUSIONS: CAT is a valid procedure for the identification of emotional and behavioral problems in children aged 10-11 years. It may support the efficient and accurate identification of children with overall, and potentially also specific, emotional and behavioral problems in routine PCH