ArticleBMC psychiatry2023
Exploring the psychometric properties of the externalizing spectrum inventory-brief form in a Swedish forensic psychiatric inpatient sample.
Article in BMC psychiatry, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. 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.
- The Psychometric Properties and Clinical Usefulness of the Difficulties in Emotion Regulation Scale in Forensic Settings.Journal of clinical psychology · 2026Article
- Substance use disorder in forensic hospitals: A scoping review of practices and interventions.Drug and alcohol dependence reports · 2026Review
- Pinpointing change in virtual reality assisted treatment for violent offenders: a pilot study of Virtual Reality Aggression Prevention Training (VRAPT).Frontiers in psychiatry · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe Externalizing Spectrum Inventory-Brief Form (ESI-BF) [1] is a 160-item self-report instrument designed for the assessment of externalizing psychopathology, yet few studies to date have evaluated its psychometric properties, structural fit, and criterion validity in forensic psychiatric settings.
methodsHere, we investigated these aspects in a sample of forensic psychiatric inpatients (n = 77) from a maximum-security forensic psychiatric hospital in Sweden. We firstly investigated the reliability. Secondly, using confirmatory factor analysis, the structure of the ESI-BF. And thirdly, using a Bayesian approach, assessed how the three ESI-BF subfactors relate to criterion measures of antisocial behaviors, substance use, and lifetime externalizing spectrum diagnoses.
resultsThe ESI-BF demonstrated good to adequate reliability and internal consistency, with all but four facet scales exhibiting α and ω values ≥ 0.80. Average inter-item correlations for the facet scales ranged from 0.31 to 0.74. However, all structural models exhibited poor to mediocre fit, with model fit values for the CFI being 0.66, 0.79 and 0.87 and RMSEA values of 0.14, 0.12 and 0.09. for the unidimensional correlated factors and bifactor model, respectively. Regarding criterion validity, all subscales of the item-based ESI-BF three-factor model exhibited robust correlations with the Life History of Aggression total, aggression and antisocial/consequences subscales, with correlations ranging from 0.29 to 0.55. All ESI-BF subfactors demonstrated robust associations, yet with different externalizing outcomes, lending tentative support to its criterion validity.
conclusionDespite remaining ambiguities regarding its structural fit, the ESI-BF may be promising for assessing externalizing psychopathology in forensic psychiatric populations. However, further investigation of the ESI-BF is needed before any firm conclusions can be drawn about its appropriateness in forensic psychiatric settings.
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.