Predictive validity for the clinical diagnosis of a new parent questionnaire, the CABI, compared with CBCL

Author:

Cianchetti Carlo1ORCID,Faedda Noemi2,Pasculli Marcello3,Ledda Maria Giuseppina4,Diaz Giacomo5,Peschechera Antonia6,Craig Francesco6,Morelli Federica7,Balottin Umberto78,Guidetti Vincenzo2,Zuddas Alessandro3,Margari Lucia6

Affiliation:

1. Child and Adolescent Neuropsychiatry, University of Cagliari, Italy

2. Department of Human Neuroscience, Section of Child and Adolescent Neuropsychiatry, Sapienza University of Rome, Italy

3. Child and Adolescent Neuropsychiatry Unit, Department of Biomedical Sciences, University of Cagliari & Antonio Cao Paediatric Hospital, G. Brotzu Hospital Trust, Italy

4. Child and Adolescent Neuropsychiatry Unit, Antonio Cao Paediatric Hospital, G. Brotzu Hospital Trust, Italy

5. Department of Biomedical Sciences, University of Cagliari, Italy

6. Child Neuropsychiatry Unit, University of Bari Aldo Moro, Italy

7. Child Neuropsychiatry Unit, University of Pavia, Italy

8. IRCCS Mondino Foundation, Italy

Abstract

Background: The questionnaires completed by the parents give a first general information on the behavioral problems of the child–adolescent, as a useful orientation to the clinical evaluation. The Child and Adolescent Behavior Inventory (CABI) is a 75-item parent questionnaire, which explores a large number of problem areas. The study of its predictive validity for the clinical diagnosis, in comparison with the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders ( DSM)-oriented scales of the Child Behavior Checklist (CBCL), can assess whether its use may be advantageous. Material and Methods: Parents/caregivers of 462 children and adolescents responded to both CABI and CBCL as a preliminary routine investigation. The results were compared with those of diagnoses obtained after the completion of the usual clinical procedure. Results: Accuracy values (probability of correct classification) resulted high for both instruments and significantly better for CABI anxiety and attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) scales, and for CBCL oppositional defiant disorder (ODD) and conduct disorder (CD) scales; no significant difference was found for depression scales. All the areas under the curve (AUC) of the receiver operating characteristic analysis reached excellent values, suggesting a very good predictive ability of the five scales of the two instruments. The comparison of AUC showed the CABI’s anxiety and ADHD scales to give significantly higher values than those of CBCL, indicating that these two scales have a better predictive ability. Conclusion: The study indicates a very good comparative (vs CBCL) and predictive validity of the CABI, suggesting an advantage in the use of this shorter questionnaire, available for free use both for clinical practice and supposedly for screening and epidemiological evaluations.

Publisher

SAGE Publications

Subject

Psychiatry and Mental health,Clinical Psychology,General Medicine,Pediatrics, Perinatology, and Child Health

Reference28 articles.

1. DSM-Oriented and Empirically Based Approaches to Constructing Scales From the Same Item Pools

2. American Psychiatric Association. (2000). DSM-IV-TR: Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (4th ed.).

3. Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders

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