Testing the psychometric quality of screening tools for the well-being of children and caregivers in alternative care-settings: a multi-informant study with families in Tanzania

IF 0.7 Q4 FAMILY STUDIES
Tobias Hecker, Getrude Mkinga, Katharina Hach, Ronald Ssentuuwa, Maregesi Machumu, N. P. Rygaard, Lene Godiksen, Florian Scharpf
{"title":"Testing the psychometric quality of screening tools for the well-being of children and caregivers in alternative care-settings: a multi-informant study with families in Tanzania","authors":"Tobias Hecker, Getrude Mkinga, Katharina Hach, Ronald Ssentuuwa, Maregesi Machumu, N. P. Rygaard, Lene Godiksen, Florian Scharpf","doi":"10.1080/17450128.2022.2075068","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Given the lack of validated screening tools for the well-being of children and caregivers in family-based care in low-income settings, the present study aimed to test the psychometric quality of two newly developed tools: Scorecard A as a screener for children’s emotional and behavioral problems and Scorecard B as a screener for caregivers’ well-being and resources. The study was conducted within the framework of an ongoing caregiver training program in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania, and included a sample of 124 caregivers and 99 children (57 girls, M age = 9.30, SD = 4.65, range 3–17) divided in three equally sized age groups of preschool (3 to 5 years), primary school (6 to 12 years) and secondary school age (13 to 17 years). Caregivers reported on children’s emotional and behavioral problems using Scorecard A and the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ) administered as a structured interview. A sub-sample (n = 78) of caregivers participated in another structured interview on various aspects of their well-being and caregiving resources, based on which interviewers rated Scorecard B. Additionally, caregivers completed Scorecard B and measures of their well-being and resources administered as self-report questionnaires. All assessments were conducted twice with an interval of 1 week. Scorecard A showed good internal consistency and test-retest-reliability across age groups and significant associations with the SDQ total score and subscales indicate convergent validity, particularly among preschool-aged children. The internal consistency of Scorecard B was acceptable in the questionnaire and good in the interviewer rating, while re-test-reliability in both modes and inter-rater reliability between interviewer and caregiver rating were moderate. Associations with established measures of well-being and resources provided evidence for convergent validity of Scorecard B. The Scorecards hold promise as brief screening tools to identify children and caregivers with difficulties and evaluate intervention programs in low-resource contexts.","PeriodicalId":46101,"journal":{"name":"Vulnerable Children and Youth Studies","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2022-05-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Vulnerable Children and Youth Studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17450128.2022.2075068","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"FAMILY STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

ABSTRACT Given the lack of validated screening tools for the well-being of children and caregivers in family-based care in low-income settings, the present study aimed to test the psychometric quality of two newly developed tools: Scorecard A as a screener for children’s emotional and behavioral problems and Scorecard B as a screener for caregivers’ well-being and resources. The study was conducted within the framework of an ongoing caregiver training program in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania, and included a sample of 124 caregivers and 99 children (57 girls, M age = 9.30, SD = 4.65, range 3–17) divided in three equally sized age groups of preschool (3 to 5 years), primary school (6 to 12 years) and secondary school age (13 to 17 years). Caregivers reported on children’s emotional and behavioral problems using Scorecard A and the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ) administered as a structured interview. A sub-sample (n = 78) of caregivers participated in another structured interview on various aspects of their well-being and caregiving resources, based on which interviewers rated Scorecard B. Additionally, caregivers completed Scorecard B and measures of their well-being and resources administered as self-report questionnaires. All assessments were conducted twice with an interval of 1 week. Scorecard A showed good internal consistency and test-retest-reliability across age groups and significant associations with the SDQ total score and subscales indicate convergent validity, particularly among preschool-aged children. The internal consistency of Scorecard B was acceptable in the questionnaire and good in the interviewer rating, while re-test-reliability in both modes and inter-rater reliability between interviewer and caregiver rating were moderate. Associations with established measures of well-being and resources provided evidence for convergent validity of Scorecard B. The Scorecards hold promise as brief screening tools to identify children and caregivers with difficulties and evaluate intervention programs in low-resource contexts.
测试替代护理环境中儿童和照顾者幸福感筛查工具的心理测量质量:一项针对坦桑尼亚家庭的多信息研究
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
1.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
33
期刊介绍: Vulnerable Children and Youth Studies is an essential peer-reviewed journal analyzing psychological, sociological, health, gender, cultural, economic, and educational aspects of children and adolescents in developed and developing countries. This international publication forum provides a much-needed interdisciplinary focus on vulnerable children and youth at risk, specifically in relation to health and welfare issues, such as mental health, illness (including HIV/AIDS), disability, abuse, neglect, institutionalization, poverty, orphanhood, exploitation, war, famine, and disaster.
×
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