Journal of child psychology and psychiatry, and allied disciplines · 2019
Measuring strengths and weaknesses in dimensional psychiatry.
СтатьяПоддержка NIH: внешняя программаПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Alexander Lindsay M, Salum Giovanni A, Swanson James M, Milham Michael P
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: The Extended Strengths and Weaknesses Assessment of Normal Behavior (E-SWAN) reconceptualizes each diagnostic criterion for selected DSM-5 disorders as a behavior, which can range from high (strengths) to low (weaknesses). Initial development focused on Panic Disorder, Social Anxiety, Major Depression, and Disruptive Mood Dysregulation Disorder.
METHODS: Data were collected from 523 participants (ages 6-17). Parents completed each of the four E-SWAN scales and traditional unidirectional scales addressing the same disorders. Distributional properties, Item Response Theory Analysis (IRT), and Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) curves were used to assess and compare the performance of E-SWAN and traditional scales.
RESULTS: In contrast to the traditional scales, which exhibited truncated distributions, all four E-SWAN scales had symmetric distributions. IRT analyses indicate the E-SWAN subscales provided reliable information about respondents throughout the population distribution; traditional scales only provided reliable information about respondents at the high end of the distribution. Predictive value for DSM-5 diagnoses was comparable to prior scales.
CONCLUSIONS: E-SWAN bidirectional scales can capture the full spectrum of the population distribution of behavior underlying DSM disorders. The additional information provided can better inform examination of inter-individual variation in population studies, as well as facilitate the identification of factors related to resiliency in clinical samples.
METHODS: Data were collected from 523 participants (ages 6-17). Parents completed each of the four E-SWAN scales and traditional unidirectional scales addressing the same disorders. Distributional properties, Item Response Theory Analysis (IRT), and Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) curves were used to assess and compare the performance of E-SWAN and traditional scales.
RESULTS: In contrast to the traditional scales, which exhibited truncated distributions, all four E-SWAN scales had symmetric distributions. IRT analyses indicate the E-SWAN subscales provided reliable information about respondents throughout the population distribution; traditional scales only provided reliable information about respondents at the high end of the distribution. Predictive value for DSM-5 diagnoses was comparable to prior scales.
CONCLUSIONS: E-SWAN bidirectional scales can capture the full spectrum of the population distribution of behavior underlying DSM disorders. The additional information provided can better inform examination of inter-individual variation in population studies, as well as facilitate the identification of factors related to resiliency in clinical samples.