Horrevorts Esther M B, van Grieken Amy, Mieloo Cathelijne L, Hafkamp-de Groen Esther, Bannink Rienke, Bouwmeester-Landweer Merian B R, Broeren Suzanne, Raat Hein
Department of Public Health, Erasmus MC University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Municipality of Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
BMJ Open. 2017 Aug 23;7(8):e016140. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2017-016140.
To determine the feasibility, concurrent validity and discriminatory power of the instrument for Identification of Parents At Risk for child Abuse and Neglect (IPARAN) among Dutch parents with a newborn child.
Community paediatrics.
Data from a controlled trial were used. In total, 2659 Dutch parents with a newborn child were invited to participate. Of the 2659 parents, 759 parents filled in the consent form and participated in the study.
Concurrent validity was determined by calculating correlations-using the Pearson's correlation (r)-between the IPARAN score and related constructs from the following instruments: the Empowerment Questionnaire 2.0, the Family Functioning Questionnaire and the Parenting Stress Questionnaire. Discriminatory power was determined by calculating receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves between high-risk mothers and low-risk mothers according to their scores on the related constructs. Feasibility was determined by examining the percentage of missing answers.
In terms of concurrent validity, we found that 3 out of 12 correlations between the IPARAN score and related constructs were strong (ie, r>0.50) and 4 out of 12 were medium (ie, r=0.30-0.49). In terms of discriminatory power, mothers with a score in the borderline/clinical range or lowest 10 percent (P10) range of the related constructs (high-risk mothers) had a higher IPARAN score than mothers with a score in the normal range or highest 90 percent (P90) range of the related constructs (low-risk mothers). Effect sizes varied from d=0.37 to d=1.93, and the area under the ROC curve varied from 0.62 to 0.93. Regarding feasibility, the part of the IPARAN filled in by the mother had on average 0.7% missing answers, whereas the part of the IPARAN filled in by the father had on average 1.7% missing answers.
The results of this study support the concurrent validity, discriminatory power and feasibility of the IPARAN among a population of Dutch parents with a newborn child.
确定虐待和忽视儿童风险家长识别工具（IPARAN）在荷兰有新生儿的家长群体中的可行性、同时效度和区分能力。
社区儿科学。
使用了一项对照试验的数据。总共邀请了2659名荷兰有新生儿的家长参与。在这2659名家长中，759名家长填写了同意书并参与了研究。
通过计算IPARAN得分与以下工具的相关结构之间的相关性（使用Pearson相关系数r）来确定同时效度：赋权问卷2.0、家庭功能问卷和育儿压力问卷。根据高危母亲和低危母亲在相关结构上的得分计算受试者工作特征（ROC）曲线来确定区分能力。通过检查缺失答案的百分比来确定可行性。
在同时效度方面，我们发现IPARAN得分与相关结构之间的12个相关性中有3个较强（即r>0.50），12个中有4个中等（即r = 0.30 - 0.49）。在区分能力方面，在相关结构的临界/临床范围或最低10%（P10）范围内得分的母亲（高危母亲）的IPARAN得分高于在相关结构的正常范围或最高90%（P90）范围内得分的母亲（低危母亲）。效应大小从d = 0.37到d = 1.93不等，ROC曲线下面积从0.62到0.93不等。关于可行性，母亲填写的IPARAN部分平均有0.7%的缺失答案，而父亲填写的IPARAN部分平均有1.7%的缺失答案。
本研究结果支持IPARAN在荷兰有新生儿的家长群体中的同时效度、区分能力和可行性。
