A Reanalysis: SRSS-IE Internalizing Cut Scores to Support Data-Informed Decision-Making Efforts in Elementary Schools

IF 2.1 4区 心理学 Q1 EDUCATION, SPECIAL
Kathleen Lynne Lane, Katie Scarlett Lane Pelton, Nathan Allen Lane, Mark Matthew Buckman, Wendy Peia Oakes, Kandace Fleming, Rebecca E. Swinburne Romine, Emily D. Cantwell
{"title":"A Reanalysis: SRSS-IE Internalizing Cut Scores to Support Data-Informed Decision-Making Efforts in Elementary Schools","authors":"Kathleen Lynne Lane, Katie Scarlett Lane Pelton, Nathan Allen Lane, Mark Matthew Buckman, Wendy Peia Oakes, Kandace Fleming, Rebecca E. Swinburne Romine, Emily D. Cantwell","doi":"10.1177/01987429241289912","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"We report findings of this replication study, examining the internalizing subscale (SRSS-I4) of the revised version of the Student Risk Screening Scale for Internalizing and Externalizing behavior (SRSS-IE 9) and the internalizing subscale of the Teacher Report Form (TRF). Using the sample from 13 elementary schools across three states with 195 K–5 students, we replicated the initial data analytic plan used to determine initial cutting scores. Results from logistic regression and receiver operator characteristic curves suggested the following preliminary SRSS-I4 risk categories: 0–1 low, 2 moderate, and 3–12 high risk for internalizing behavior patterns relative to the TRF internalizing subscale score. Results yielded adequate levels of sensitivity and specificity for the first cut, and questionable sensitivity for the upper cut. We planned to conduct subsequent analysis to address the nested nature of the data. Yet, most teachers completed the TRF for one student making this not possible. We discuss limitations and directions for future research, calling for replication with larger samples to facilitate nesting given schoolwide screening practices involve teachers screening multiple students. We also encourage consideration of two risk categories: 0–1 for low and 2+ for a risk category, not distinguishing between moderate- and high-risk categories.","PeriodicalId":47249,"journal":{"name":"Behavioral Disorders","volume":"46 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Behavioral Disorders","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/01987429241289912","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION, SPECIAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

We report findings of this replication study, examining the internalizing subscale (SRSS-I4) of the revised version of the Student Risk Screening Scale for Internalizing and Externalizing behavior (SRSS-IE 9) and the internalizing subscale of the Teacher Report Form (TRF). Using the sample from 13 elementary schools across three states with 195 K–5 students, we replicated the initial data analytic plan used to determine initial cutting scores. Results from logistic regression and receiver operator characteristic curves suggested the following preliminary SRSS-I4 risk categories: 0–1 low, 2 moderate, and 3–12 high risk for internalizing behavior patterns relative to the TRF internalizing subscale score. Results yielded adequate levels of sensitivity and specificity for the first cut, and questionable sensitivity for the upper cut. We planned to conduct subsequent analysis to address the nested nature of the data. Yet, most teachers completed the TRF for one student making this not possible. We discuss limitations and directions for future research, calling for replication with larger samples to facilitate nesting given schoolwide screening practices involve teachers screening multiple students. We also encourage consideration of two risk categories: 0–1 for low and 2+ for a risk category, not distinguishing between moderate- and high-risk categories.
重新分析:SRSS-IE内化切分分数支持小学根据数据做出决策的努力
我们报告了这项复制研究的结果,研究了修订版学生内化和外化行为风险筛查量表(SRSS-I9)的内化分量表(SRSS-I4)和教师报告表(TRF)的内化分量表。我们使用来自三个州的 13 所小学的 195 名 K-5 级学生作为样本,复制了用于确定初始切分分数的初始数据分析计划。逻辑回归和受体运算特征曲线的结果表明,SRSS-I4 的初步风险类别如下:相对于 TRF 内化子量表得分,内化行为模式的风险分为 0-1 低、2 中和 3-12 高。结果表明,第一个分级的灵敏度和特异性水平足够高,而上一级分级的灵敏度则值得商榷。我们计划进行后续分析,以解决数据的嵌套性问题。然而,大多数教师只为一名学生填写了 TRF,因此无法进行分析。我们讨论了研究的局限性和未来研究的方向,鉴于全校筛查工作涉及教师对多名学生的筛查,我们呼吁用更大的样本进行复制,以促进嵌套。我们还鼓励考虑两个风险类别:0-1代表低风险,2+代表一个风险类别,不区分中度风险和高度风险类别。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
11
期刊介绍: Behavioral Disorders is sent to all members of the Council for Children with Behavioral Disorders (CCBD), a division of the Council for Exceptional Children (CEC). All CCBD members must first be members of CEC.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信