Vogels T, Reijneveld S A, Brugman E, den Hollander-Gijsman M, Verhulst F C, Verloove-Vanhorick S P
TNO Prevention and Health, Leiden, The Netherlands.
Eur J Public Health. 2003 Dec;13(4):353-60. doi: 10.1093/eurpub/13.4.353.
An extended re-assessment of the psychometric properties of the LSPPK, an instrument aimed at identifying children with emotional and behavioural problems.
Data came from a national sample in The Netherlands of parents of 1248 children (aged 5-6 years) interviewed by child health professionals (CHP). Data were obtained regarding psychosocial problems, treatment status and scores on the LSPPK (Parent and CHP Index), and on the Child Behavior Checklist (CBCL). The scale structure, reliability, criterion and content validity and added value of the LSPPK were assessed using the CBCL and treatment status as criteria.
The scale structure corresponded with that found originally; the LSPPK improved the prediction of problems according to the CBCL, compared to predictions using readily available risk indicators alone. Reliability varied between 0.55 and 0.69. For the LSPPK Parent Index, sensitivity varied between 0.42 and 0.50. For the CHP Index sensitivity varied between 0.60 and 0.96, but specificity varied between 0.76 and 0.79. Both indices were very sensitive for attention and social problems, but less so for other problems.
The LSPPK Parent Index cannot distinguish sufficiently between children with or without serious problems. Either too many children with problems remain unnoticed or too many children without problems are labelled as a case. The LSPPK CHP Index, reflecting the CHP's interpretation of the Parent Index after interviewing the parents does not compensate adequately for the weaknesses of the Parent Index. Better assessment procedures and strategies need to be developed.
对LSPPK(一种旨在识别有情绪和行为问题儿童的工具)的心理测量特性进行扩展重新评估。
数据来自荷兰全国范围内由儿童健康专业人员(CHP)对1248名儿童(5 - 6岁)的父母进行访谈的样本。获取了有关心理社会问题、治疗状况以及LSPPK(家长指数和CHP指数)和儿童行为清单(CBCL)得分的数据。以CBCL和治疗状况为标准,评估LSPPK的量表结构、信度、效标效度、内容效度和附加值。
量表结构与最初发现的一致;与仅使用现成风险指标进行预测相比,LSPPK根据CBCL改进了对问题的预测。信度在0.55至0.69之间变化。对于LSPPK家长指数,敏感度在0.42至0.50之间变化。对于CHP指数,敏感度在0.60至0.96之间变化,但特异度在0.76至0.79之间变化。两个指数对注意力和社交问题都非常敏感,但对其他问题则不然。
LSPPK家长指数无法充分区分有或没有严重问题的儿童。要么有太多有问题的儿童未被注意到,要么有太多没有问题的儿童被标记为病例。LSPPK CHP指数反映了CHP在访谈家长后对家长指数的解读,并未充分弥补家长指数的弱点。需要开发更好的评估程序和策略。