Differences among fathers, mothers, and teachers in symptom assessment of ADHD patients

Author:

Huang Xia,Li Hui-Qin,Simpson Alan,Xu Jia-Jun,Tang Wan-Jie,Li Yuan-Yuan

Abstract

BackgroundThe Swanson Nolan, and Pelham scale version IV (SNAP-IV) is the most critical tool for ADHD screening and diagnosis, which has two scoring methods. ADHD requires symptom assessment in multiple scenarios, and parent and teacher reports are indispensable for diagnosing ADHD. But the differences of assessment results from fathers, mothers and teachers, and the consistency of results from different scoring methods are unknown. Therefore, we carried out this study to understand the differences in the scores of fathers, mothers and teachers using SNAP-IV for children with ADHD and to explore the differences in scoring results under different scoring methods.MethodsThe SNAP-IV scale and Demographics Questionnaire and Familiarity Index were used to survey fathers, mothers and head teachers. Measurement data are expressed as the mean ± standard deviation (x ± s). The enumeration data were described by frequency and percentage. ANOVA was used to compare group differences in mothers’, fathers’, and teachers’ mean SNAP-IV scores. The Bonferroni method was used for post hoc multiple comparison tests. Cochran’s Q test was used to compare the differences in the abnormal rate of SNAP-IV score results of mothers, fathers and teachers. Dunn’s test was used for post hoc multiple comparison tests.ResultsThere were differences in scores among the three groups, and the differences showed inconsistent trends across the different subscales. Differences between groups were calculated again with familiarity as a control variable. The results showed the familiarity of parents and teachers with the patients did not affect the differences in their scores. The evaluation results were different under two assessment methods.ConclusionResults concluded that fathers did not appear to be an appropriate candidate for evaluation. When using the SNAP-V for assessment, it should be comprehensively considered from both the scorer and symptom dimensions.

Publisher

Frontiers Media SA

Subject

Psychiatry and Mental health

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3