Screening Child Social-emotional and Behavioral Functioning in Low-Income African Country Contexts.

Jacobs journal of psychiatry and behavioral science Pub Date : 2016-12-01 Epub Date: 2016-11-21
Janet Nakigudde, Besa Bauta, Sharon Wolf, Keng-Yen Huang
{"title":"Screening Child Social-emotional and Behavioral Functioning in Low-Income African Country Contexts.","authors":"Janet Nakigudde,&nbsp;Besa Bauta,&nbsp;Sharon Wolf,&nbsp;Keng-Yen Huang","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>children in low-income countries (LICs). Currently, there is little information available on the use of brief screening instruments Increased attention is being paid to identifying and responding to the social-emotional and behavioral needs of in LICs. The lack of psychometrically sound brief assessment tools creates a challenge in determining the population prevalence of child social-emotional and behavioral risk burden in Sub-Saharan African (SSA) country contexts. This study sought to determine the reliability and validity of three brief parent-rated screening tools-the Social Competence Scale (SCS), Pictorial Pediatric Symptom Checklist (PPSC), and the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ)-in Uganda. These tools consider both strength- and pathology-based dimensions of child outcomes.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Parents of 154 Ugandan 5-9 year-old children who were enrolled in Nursery to Primary 3 in Kampala (the capital city of Uganda) and part of a school-based mental health intervention trial were recruited and interviewed. About 54% of parents had educational attainment of primary school level or less. One hundred and one of these parents were interviewed a second time, about 5 months after the first/baseline assessment. Data from both time points were utilized to assess reliability and validity.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Inspection of psychometric properties supports the utility of these three brief screening measures to assess children's social-emotional and behavioral functioning as demonstrated by adequate internal consistency, temporal stability, discriminant validity, concurrent validity, and predictive validity. Subscales from three screening measures were inter-related and associated with family characteristics, such as parental depression and food insecurity, in the expected directions.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This study provides evidence supporting the appropriateness of using three tools and applying the developmental and behavioral constructs measured in each assessment in a low-income African setting.</p>","PeriodicalId":92389,"journal":{"name":"Jacobs journal of psychiatry and behavioral science","volume":"2 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6107071/pdf/nihms853882.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Jacobs journal of psychiatry and behavioral science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2016/11/21 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: children in low-income countries (LICs). Currently, there is little information available on the use of brief screening instruments Increased attention is being paid to identifying and responding to the social-emotional and behavioral needs of in LICs. The lack of psychometrically sound brief assessment tools creates a challenge in determining the population prevalence of child social-emotional and behavioral risk burden in Sub-Saharan African (SSA) country contexts. This study sought to determine the reliability and validity of three brief parent-rated screening tools-the Social Competence Scale (SCS), Pictorial Pediatric Symptom Checklist (PPSC), and the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ)-in Uganda. These tools consider both strength- and pathology-based dimensions of child outcomes.

Methods: Parents of 154 Ugandan 5-9 year-old children who were enrolled in Nursery to Primary 3 in Kampala (the capital city of Uganda) and part of a school-based mental health intervention trial were recruited and interviewed. About 54% of parents had educational attainment of primary school level or less. One hundred and one of these parents were interviewed a second time, about 5 months after the first/baseline assessment. Data from both time points were utilized to assess reliability and validity.

Results: Inspection of psychometric properties supports the utility of these three brief screening measures to assess children's social-emotional and behavioral functioning as demonstrated by adequate internal consistency, temporal stability, discriminant validity, concurrent validity, and predictive validity. Subscales from three screening measures were inter-related and associated with family characteristics, such as parental depression and food insecurity, in the expected directions.

Conclusion: This study provides evidence supporting the appropriateness of using three tools and applying the developmental and behavioral constructs measured in each assessment in a low-income African setting.

在低收入非洲国家背景下筛查儿童社会情感和行为功能。
背景:低收入国家的儿童。目前,关于使用简短筛查工具的信息很少。人们越来越注意识别和应对低收入国家的社会情感和行为需要。在撒哈拉以南非洲(SSA)国家背景下,缺乏心理测量学上合理的简短评估工具,这对确定儿童社会情感和行为风险负担的人口流行程度构成了挑战。本研究旨在确定乌干达三种简短的家长评定筛查工具——社会能力量表(SCS)、儿童症状图片检查表(PPSC)和优势与困难问卷(SDQ)的信度和效度。这些工具考虑了基于力量和病理的儿童结局维度。方法:招募并访谈154名乌干达5-9岁儿童的父母,这些儿童在坎帕拉(乌干达首都)幼儿园至小学三年级就读,并参与了一项以学校为基础的心理健康干预试验。约54%的家长受教育程度为小学或以下。其中101名家长在第一次/基线评估后约5个月接受了第二次访谈。两个时间点的数据被用来评估信度和效度。结果:心理测量特性的检验支持了这三种简短的筛选措施的效用,以评估儿童的社会情绪和行为功能,证明了足够的内部一致性、时间稳定性、区别效度、并发效度和预测效度。三个筛选措施的子量表在预期方向上与家庭特征(如父母抑郁和食物不安全)相互关联并相关。结论:本研究提供了证据,支持在低收入非洲环境中使用三种工具并应用每种评估中测量的发展和行为结构的适当性。
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信