Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center and the University of Cincinnati College of Medicine, Ohio.
J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry. 2021 Jun;60(6):690-709. doi: 10.1016/j.jaac.2020.10.016. Epub 2020 Nov 6.
To conduct a systematic review of the measures designed to assess sluggish cognitive tempo (SCT) since the first SCT scale using careful test-construction procedures was published in 2009.
MEDLINE (PubMed), Embase, PsychINFO, and Web of Science databases were searched from September 2009 through December 2019. Articles reporting on reliability (internal consistency, test-retest, and interrater reliability), structural validity (an aspect of construct validity focused on items' convergent and discriminant validity), concurrent and longitudinal external validity, invariance, or intervention/experimental findings were included.
Full criteria for data extraction and inclusion were met by 76 studies. Nine measures for assessing SCT were identified (7 assessing parent report, teacher report, and/or self-report in children and 2 assessing self-report and/or collateral informant report in adults). Each measure demonstrated acceptable to excellent reliability. All or at least the majority of SCT items on each measure also had structural validity (high loadings on an SCT factor and low loadings on an attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder [ADHD] inattention factor). Studies have supported the invariance of SCT across sex and time, and there is initial evidence of invariance across informants, youths with ADHD and youths without ADHD, and ADHD presentations. The Child and Adolescent Behavior Inventory (CABI), Child Concentration Inventory, Second Edition (CCI-2), and Barkley Adult ADHD Rating Scale-IV (BAARS-IV) have particularly strong support for assessing parent/teacher-reported, youth self-reported, and adult self-reported SCT, respectively.
The SCT measures included in this review share numerous positive properties, have promising psychometric support, and have proven useful for examining the external correlates of SCT across the life span. Although substantial progress has been made over the last decade, work remains to be done to further improve the assessment of SCT and key directions for future research are provided.
自 2009 年首次使用精心设计的测试构建程序发布用于评估迟钝认知节奏(SCT)的量表以来,对旨在评估 SCT 的各种方法进行系统综述。
2009 年 9 月至 2019 年 12 月,检索 MEDLINE(PubMed)、Embase、PsychINFO 和 Web of Science 数据库,纳入报告信度(内部一致性、重测信度和评分者间信度)、结构效度(结构效度的一个方面,侧重于项目的聚合和区分效度)、同时和纵向外部效度、不变性或干预/实验结果的文章。
76 项研究完全符合数据提取和纳入标准。确定了 9 种用于评估 SCT 的方法(7 种用于评估儿童的父母报告、教师报告和/或自我报告,2 种用于评估成人的自我报告和/或间接报告)。每种方法的信度都在可接受至优秀的范围内。每种方法的 SCT 项目都具有结构效度(在 SCT 因素上具有较高的负荷,在注意力缺陷/多动障碍[ADHD]注意力不集中因素上具有较低的负荷)。研究支持 SCT 在性别和时间上的不变性,并且有初步证据表明在信息提供者、ADHD 青少年和非 ADHD 青少年以及 ADHD 表现之间具有不变性。儿童和青少年行为问卷(CABI)、儿童集中力量表,第二版(CCI-2)和 Barkley 成人 ADHD 评定量表-IV(BAARS-IV)在评估父母/教师报告、青少年自我报告和成人自我报告的 SCT 方面具有特别强的支持。
本综述中包含的 SCT 测量方法具有许多共同的积极特性,具有有前途的心理计量学支持,并已被证明在整个生命周期内用于检查 SCT 的外部相关性方面非常有用。尽管在过去十年中取得了重大进展,但仍需要进一步改进 SCT 的评估,并为未来的研究提供了关键方向。