Concurrent Validity of the CBCL DSM-Oriented Scales: Evidence from the ABCD Study.

IF 2
Clinical child psychology and psychiatry Pub Date : 2026-10-01 Epub Date: 2026-03-13 DOI:10.1177/13591045261431338
Lindsay C Chromik, Lauren M Friedman
{"title":"Concurrent Validity of the CBCL DSM-Oriented Scales: Evidence from the ABCD Study.","authors":"Lindsay C Chromik, Lauren M Friedman","doi":"10.1177/13591045261431338","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>ObjectivePrevious research has yielded mixed findings regarding the validity of the Child Behavior Checklist (CBCL) DSM-Oriented Scales (DOSs) in identifying DSM diagnoses. The present study evaluates the concurrent validity of the DOSs by comparing scale classifications with a gold-standard clinical interview.MethodsParticipants (<i>N</i> = 11,851) were children in the NIH Adolescent Brain Cognitive Development (ABCD) study whose caregivers completed the CBCL and the Kiddie Schedule for Affective Disorders and Schizophrenia (KSADS) semi-structured interview at baseline (9.92 years, SD = 0.63), two-year follow-up (12.03 years, SD = 0.67), or both.Results2,321 (19.59%) children at baseline and 1,708 (15.57%) participants at two-year follow-up met criteria for one or more KSADS disorders. Sensitivity of the CBCL relative to KSADS diagnoses was generally low (10.36% - 75.00%), with only two scales above 50%. Specificity was high (92.47% - 97.07%). Positive predictive values were low (0.71% - 48.20%), and negative predictive values were high (89.84% - 99.90%). Area under the curve (AUC) ranged from 0.55 to 0.84.DiscussionIn the present sample, the DOSs showed poor concurrent validity with a gold standard clinical interview. Caution should be exercised when using the CBCL due to the high rates of false negatives.</p>","PeriodicalId":93938,"journal":{"name":"Clinical child psychology and psychiatry","volume":" ","pages":"1890-1909"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2026-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13679724/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical child psychology and psychiatry","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/13591045261431338","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/3/13 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

ObjectivePrevious research has yielded mixed findings regarding the validity of the Child Behavior Checklist (CBCL) DSM-Oriented Scales (DOSs) in identifying DSM diagnoses. The present study evaluates the concurrent validity of the DOSs by comparing scale classifications with a gold-standard clinical interview.MethodsParticipants (N = 11,851) were children in the NIH Adolescent Brain Cognitive Development (ABCD) study whose caregivers completed the CBCL and the Kiddie Schedule for Affective Disorders and Schizophrenia (KSADS) semi-structured interview at baseline (9.92 years, SD = 0.63), two-year follow-up (12.03 years, SD = 0.67), or both.Results2,321 (19.59%) children at baseline and 1,708 (15.57%) participants at two-year follow-up met criteria for one or more KSADS disorders. Sensitivity of the CBCL relative to KSADS diagnoses was generally low (10.36% - 75.00%), with only two scales above 50%. Specificity was high (92.47% - 97.07%). Positive predictive values were low (0.71% - 48.20%), and negative predictive values were high (89.84% - 99.90%). Area under the curve (AUC) ranged from 0.55 to 0.84.DiscussionIn the present sample, the DOSs showed poor concurrent validity with a gold standard clinical interview. Caution should be exercised when using the CBCL due to the high rates of false negatives.

CBCL dsm导向量表的并发效度:来自ABCD研究的证据。
目的以往的研究对儿童行为检查表(CBCL)和DSM导向量表(DOSs)鉴别DSM诊断的有效性得出了不同的结论。本研究通过比较量表分类和金标准临床访谈来评估dos的并发效度。方法参与者(N = 11851)为NIH青少年脑认知发展(ABCD)研究中的儿童,其照顾者在基线时(9.92年,SD = 0.63)、两年随访(12.03年,SD = 0.67)完成了CBCL和儿童情感障碍和精神分裂症时间表(KSADS)半结构化访谈。结果基线时2321名(19.59%)儿童和两年随访时1708名(15.57%)参与者符合一种或多种KSADS障碍的标准。CBCL相对于KSADS诊断的敏感性普遍较低(10.36% - 75.00%),只有两个量表高于50%。特异性高(92.47% ~ 97.07%)。阳性预测值低(0.71% ~ 48.20%),阴性预测值高(89.84% ~ 99.90%)。曲线下面积(AUC)为0.55 ~ 0.84。在目前的样本中,DOSs与金标准临床访谈显示出较差的并发效度。由于假阴性率高,使用CBCL时应谨慎。
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
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书