ArticleAlpha psychiatry2023
Adaptation of the Strength and Difficulties Questionnaire for Use in the Republic of Georgia.
Article in Alpha psychiatry, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- A systematic comparison of intercultural and indigenous cultural dance education from a global perspective (2010-2024).Frontiers in psychology · 2024Review
- Commentary: Adaptation of the Strength and Difficulties Questionnaire for Use in the Republic of Georgia.Alpha 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Children in low-resource countries like Georgia often have limited access to assessment measures for mental health care services. This study adapts and validates the mental health screening tool the Strength and Difficulties Questionnaire for use in Georgian children. Methods: A total of 16 654 children were assessed by a parent and/or teacher using Georgian-adapted Strength and Difficulties Questionnaire. Receiver operating characteristic analyses were performed to assess the discriminative validity of the Strength and Difficulties Questionnaires and to establish an optimal cutoff score. Results: Data from 15 738 parents- and 13 560 teachers-administered Strength and Difficulties Questionnaire were analyzed. The internal consistency analysis showed Cronbach's alpha to be 0.625 and 0.621 for parent- and teacher-administered Strength and Difficulties Questionnaire, respectively. The area under the curve (95% CI) shows that the Strength and Difficulties Questionnaire can differentiate risk group children from typically developing peers: parent-administered questionnaires-0.629 (0.556-0.702) and teacher-administered questionnaires-0.680 (0.611-0.789). Parent-administered Strength and Difficulties Questionnaire has a cutoff value of 16 or more with 92.5% of sensitivity and teacher-administered Strength and Difficulties Questionnaire-14 or more with a sensitivity of 85.6%. Conclusion: The study finds that the Strength and Difficulties Questionnaire is a valid screening instrument and does not depend on the informant-parent or teacher. It suggests that with appropriate cultural adaptation, the SDQ can be used in the Republic of Georgia to identify children at risk for mental disorders and help guide resource allocation.
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.