MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4388011630 · doi:10.1016/j.acap.2023.10.007

Screening Accuracy of the Parent-Report Preschool Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire in Primary Care

2023· article· en· W4388011630 on OpenAlex
Nayantara Hattangadi, Tatjana Kay, Patricia C. Parkin, Catherine S Birken, Jonathon L. Maguire, Peter Szatmari, Meta van den Heuvel, Cornelia M. Borkhoff, Alice Charach

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueAcademic Pediatrics · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicChild and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional Development
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoSickKids FoundationCentre for Addiction and Mental HealthHospital for Sick Children
FundersMargaret and Wallace McCain Centre for Child, Youth and Family Mental HealthGarry Hurvitz Centre for Brain and Mental HealthHospital for Sick Children
KeywordsStrengths and Difficulties QuestionnaireIntraclass correlationConfidence intervalMedicinePrimary careMedical diagnosisPsychometricsPsychiatryPsychologyPediatricsClinical psychologyMental healthInternal medicineFamily medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the screening test accuracy and reliability of the parent-report preschool Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (P-SDQ) in primary care settings. METHODS: Children 24 to 48 months were recruited at scheduled primary care visits in Toronto, Canada. Parents completed the P-SDQ at baseline, 2, and 12 weeks. At 12 weeks, parents were invited to a semistructured diagnostic phone interview, the Preschool Age Psychiatric Assessment (PAPA). Criterion validity between baseline P-SDQ scores (Total Difficulties Score [TDS], internalizing and externalizing subscale) and Diagnostic and Statistical Manual, 5th edition diagnoses on PAPA was evaluated using area under the curve (AUC) and calculating screening test properties (sensitivity and specificity). Test-retest reliability at baseline and 2 weeks was evaluated using intraclass correlation coefficient. RESULTS: A total of 183 children were enrolled, mean age 39.3 (SD 7.4) months, 46.4% male, 120 (66%) completed P-SDQ at 2 weeks, 107 (58%) completed PAPA at 12 weeks. Of those with a PAPA, 26 (24%) had any psychiatric diagnosis, 17 (16%) had internalizing disorders and 4 (4%) had externalizing disorders. TDS identified any diagnosis with AUC = 0.67 (95% confidence intervals (CI): 0.55, 0.79); internalizing subscale identified internalizing disorders with AUC = 0.61 (95% CI: 0.47, 0.74); externalizing subscale identified externalizing disorders with AUC = 0.77 (95% CI: 0.60, 0.94). Sensitivity and specificity, and test-retest reliability were satisfactory for TDS and externalizing subscale, and less satisfactory for the internalizing subscale. CONCLUSIONS: The externalizing subscale has sufficient accuracy and reliability to identify children aged 2 to 4 years at risk for attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder and disruptive behavior disorders in primary care.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.027
Threshold uncertainty score0.344

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.017
GPT teacher head0.303
Teacher spread0.286 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it