Supplementary scales for the school-age forms of the Achenbach System of Empirically Based Assessment rated by adolescents, parents, and teachers: Psychometric properties in German samples.

IF 1.4 Q3 PSYCHIATRY
Julia Plück, Laurence Nawab, Elena Kamenetzka, Manfred Döpfner
{"title":"Supplementary scales for the school-age forms of the Achenbach System of Empirically Based Assessment rated by adolescents, parents, and teachers: Psychometric properties in German samples.","authors":"Julia Plück, Laurence Nawab, Elena Kamenetzka, Manfred Döpfner","doi":"10.2478/sjcapp-2025-0004","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Based on Achenbach's school-age questionnaires, research groups have investigated supplementary scales for stress problems, obsessive-compulsive problems, sluggish cognitive tempo, positive qualities, dysregulation, autism spectrum disorders, and mania in 6-18-year-olds partly only in some of the three perspectives the Achenbach System of Empirically Based Assessment (ASEBA) provides.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>We aimed to evaluate these dimensions for the German-language forms and, if possible, to extend their use to further rating perspectives.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The internal consistencies of the supplementary scales were examined for three types of informants (parents, adolescents, and teachers) and different samples (community sample, clinical sample, and disorder-specific subsamples). Age-and gender-specific effects are displayed as well as cross-informant correlations. Additionally, different aspects of validity were analyzed: (a) convergent/divergent validity via correlations with traditional ASEBA scales (problem scales as well as the scales oriented to the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders 5th edition); (b) discriminative validity via differences between clinical vs. community-based sample as well as disorder-specific subgroup vs. clinical sample.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Most of the supplementary scales showed at least acceptable internal consistency. For some scales, we found significant but rather small and informant-dependent gender and age differences. Convergent validity of the supplementary scales differed across informants. Mean differences between the supplementary scales in the clinical and the community sample as well as the diagnosis-specific subsamples were mostly significant, with predominantly large effect sizes.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Overall, the validity and reliability of the supplementary scales differed depending on informants and subgroups. While further research is necessary before the supplementary scales are implemented in clinical practice, initial recommendations for their use are derived.</p><p><strong>Trial registration: </strong>This project was carried out as a reanalysis of the datasets upon which the German norms for the school-age versions are based (1). Therefore, the trial was not registered.</p>","PeriodicalId":42655,"journal":{"name":"Scandinavian Journal of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry and Psychology","volume":"13 1","pages":"30-43"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12050941/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Scandinavian Journal of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry and Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2478/sjcapp-2025-0004","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Based on Achenbach's school-age questionnaires, research groups have investigated supplementary scales for stress problems, obsessive-compulsive problems, sluggish cognitive tempo, positive qualities, dysregulation, autism spectrum disorders, and mania in 6-18-year-olds partly only in some of the three perspectives the Achenbach System of Empirically Based Assessment (ASEBA) provides.

Objective: We aimed to evaluate these dimensions for the German-language forms and, if possible, to extend their use to further rating perspectives.

Methods: The internal consistencies of the supplementary scales were examined for three types of informants (parents, adolescents, and teachers) and different samples (community sample, clinical sample, and disorder-specific subsamples). Age-and gender-specific effects are displayed as well as cross-informant correlations. Additionally, different aspects of validity were analyzed: (a) convergent/divergent validity via correlations with traditional ASEBA scales (problem scales as well as the scales oriented to the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders 5th edition); (b) discriminative validity via differences between clinical vs. community-based sample as well as disorder-specific subgroup vs. clinical sample.

Results: Most of the supplementary scales showed at least acceptable internal consistency. For some scales, we found significant but rather small and informant-dependent gender and age differences. Convergent validity of the supplementary scales differed across informants. Mean differences between the supplementary scales in the clinical and the community sample as well as the diagnosis-specific subsamples were mostly significant, with predominantly large effect sizes.

Conclusions: Overall, the validity and reliability of the supplementary scales differed depending on informants and subgroups. While further research is necessary before the supplementary scales are implemented in clinical practice, initial recommendations for their use are derived.

Trial registration: This project was carried out as a reanalysis of the datasets upon which the German norms for the school-age versions are based (1). Therefore, the trial was not registered.

由青少年、家长和教师评定的阿肯巴赫经验性评估体系学龄形式的补充量表:德国样本的心理测量特性。
背景:基于Achenbach的学龄问卷,研究小组对6-18岁青少年的压力问题、强迫症问题、迟缓的认知节奏、积极品质、失调、自闭症谱系障碍和躁狂症的补充量表进行了调查,部分只是在Achenbach基于经验的评估系统(ASEBA)提供的三个视角中的一部分。目的:我们的目的是评估德语形式的这些维度,如果可能的话,将它们的使用扩展到进一步的评级视角。方法:对三种类型的举报人(家长、青少年和教师)和不同的样本(社区样本、临床样本和障碍特异性亚样本)进行补充量表的内部一致性检验。显示了年龄和性别特定的影响以及跨信息提供者的相关性。此外,对效度的不同方面进行了分析:(a)通过与传统ASEBA量表(问题量表以及面向精神障碍诊断与统计手册第5版的量表)的相关性进行收敛/发散效度分析;(b)通过临床与社区样本之间的差异以及疾病特异性亚组与临床样本之间的差异来判别效度。结果:大多数补充量表的内部一致性至少可接受。在一些量表中,我们发现了显著但相当小且依赖于信息提供者的性别和年龄差异。补充量表的收敛效度因被调查者而异。临床和社区样本以及诊断特异性亚样本的补充量表之间的平均差异大多显著,主要是大效应量。结论:总体而言,补充量表的效度和信度因举报人和亚组而异。虽然在临床实践中实施补充量表之前需要进一步的研究,但对其使用的初步建议已得出。试验注册:该项目是作为对德国学龄版本标准所依据的数据集的重新分析而进行的(1)。因此,该试验未注册。
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
自引率
5.30%
发文量
12
审稿时长
8 weeks
×
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