Frequency of RAD diagnosis and attachment disorder in community mental health agency clients.
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Attachment Disorder (AD) in children has been characterized by particularly alarming behaviors, yet the identification of this disorder for clinicians in community mental health agencies is problematic. The only available diagnosis that addresses attachment problems is the DSM-IV diagnosis of Reactive Attachment Disorder (RAD), a diagnosis that does not include the more severely disturbed behaviors that have been associated with attachment-disordered children. This dissertation examined the frequency with which CMHA child clients were diagnosed with RAD, as well as the actual occurrence of attachment problems and Attachment Disorder as measured by the Randolph Attachment Disorder Questionnaire (RADA). The Personality Inventory for Children, Second Edition (PIC-2) was used as another measure to explore behavior problems in this population. Results of this study indicated that less than one percent of 662 CMHA child clients had received a diagnosis of RAD. However, a total of 41% of participants in the study had attachment problems (23% with AD) as measured by the RADQ. Additional study results indicated that there was no significant difference in RADQ scores between children currently living with their birth parents and those living in other arrangements. However, as the number of caregivers for children increased, so did RADA scores, indicating there was an increase in attachment-disordered behavior problems. Significant correlations were found between the RADQ scores and the PIC-2 scales of Delinquency, Cognitive Impairment, Impulsivity/Distractibility, Reality Distortion, Psychological Discomfort, and Social Skills Deficits. No relationship was found between RADQ scores and the PIC-2 scale scores of Family Dysfunction, Somatic Concerns, and Social Withdrawal. Interviews of CMHA clinicians revealed confusion and concern regarding the DSM-IV diagnosis of Reactive Attachment Disorder and what specialists in the field refer to as Attachment Disorder. Most of the clinicians reported having had very little exposure to this diagnosis in their graduate schools' programs, and seldom assigned a diagnosis of RAD due to confusion over the criteria and concern over treatment issues.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».