ArticleFrontiers in psychology2022
Structural validity of the Norwegian version of the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire in children aged 3-6 years.
Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- 24-hour movement behaviour composition associated with desired social-emotional functioning in the early years.PloS one · 2026Article
- Article
- The sleep and activity database for the early years (SADEY) study: design and methods.Journal of activity, sedentary and sleep behaviors · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: This study examined the structural validity of the teacher-report Strength and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ) in Norwegian preschoolers aged 3-6 years. We tested the original five-factor structure, the five-factor structure with two broader second-order factors, and a three-factor structure, all suggested in the literature. Since the positively worded items in SDQ have been shown to introduce noise, we also examined all three structures with a positive construal method factor for these items. Methods: Preschool teachers from 43 preschools completed the SDQ questionnaire for 1,142 children [48% girls, mean age 4.3 (SD 0.9) years]. Confirmatory factor analyses were used to estimate and compare the six models. Measurement invariance was tested across sex (multi-group approach) and age (multiple-indicator multiple-cause approach). Results: The original five-factor structure of SDQ was supported, where the model fit improved when including a method factor for positively worded items. Both models showed scalar invariance across sex and age. The second-order and the three-factor structures were not supported. Conclusion: We recommend using the original five-factor structure when using SDQ for both clinical and research purposes in young children and adding a method factor when using structural equation modeling.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.