Abstract
Abstract
Background
This study evaluates the psychometric properties of the newly developed semi-structured interview, Interview Version of the Symptoms and Functioning Severity Scale (SFSS-I), which is designed to provide a dimensional assessment of internalizing and externalizing symptoms.
Methods
Multi-informant baseline data from the OPTIE study was used, involving 358 children and adolescents aged 6 to 17 years (M = 11.54, SD = 3.4, n = 140 [39.1%] were female). Participants were screened for internalizing and externalizing symptoms. For validity analyses, caregiver (Child Behavior Checklist), youth (Youth Self Report), and teacher ratings (Teacher Report Form) were used. We performed Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) analyses to evaluate the effectiveness of the SFSS-I subscales in distinguishing between children and adolescents diagnosed with internalizing and externalizing disorders, as determined by clinical judgement in routine care.
Results
Confirmatory factor analyses supported a correlated two-factor model for internalizing and externalizing symptoms. Acceptable to good internal consistencies (α = 0.76 to 0.89; ω = 0.76 to 0.90) and excellent interrater reliability on the scale level (ICC ≥ 0.91) was found. The ROC analyses showed an acceptable accuracy in identifying internalizing diagnoses (AUC = 0.76) and excellent accuracy for externalizing diagnoses (AUC = 0.84).
Conclusion
The SFSS-I demonstrates potential as a clinically-rated instrument for screening and routine outcome monitoring, offering utility in both clinical practice and research settings for the dimensional assessment of broad psychopathological dimensions.
Trial registration
German Clinical Trials Register (DRKS) DRKS00016737 (https://www.drks.de/DRKS00016737). Registered 17 September, 2019.
Funder
Universitätsklinikum Köln
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Reference73 articles.
1. Kasius MC. Interviewing children: Development of the Dutch version of the Semistructured Clinical Interview for Children and Adolescents (SCICA) and testing of the psychometric properties. Rotterdam: Erasmus University Rotterdam; 1997.
2. Frick PJ, Barry CT, Kamphaus RW. Structured diagnostic interviews. In: Frick PJ, Barry CT, Kamphaus RW, editors. Clinical assessment of child and adolescent personality and behavior. 3rd ed. New York, NY: Springer; 2010. pp. 253–69.
3. Leffler JM, Riebel J, Hughes HM. A review of child and adolescent diagnostic interviews for clinical practitioners. Assessment. 2015;22(6):690–703.
4. Rettew DC, Lynch AD, Achenbach TM, Dumenci L, Ivanova MY. Meta-analyses of agreement between diagnoses made from clinical evaluations and standardized diagnostic interviews. Int J Methods Psychiatr Res. 2009;18(3):169–84.
5. Segal DL, Williams KN. Structured and semistructured interviews for differential diagnosis: fundamental issues, applications, and features. In: Beidel DC, Frueh BC, Hersen M, editors. Adult psychopathology and diagnosis. 7th ed. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley; 2014. pp. 103–29.