ArticleFrontiers in psychology2024
A study on the applicability of the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire among low- and higher-educated adolescents.
Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Aim: The Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire self-report (SDQ-SR) is a valid instrument for detection of emotional and behavioral problems. The aim of this study was to compare the psychometric properties of the SDQ-SR for low and higher educated adolescents, and to explore its suitability. Methods: We included 426 adolescents. We compared internal consistency for low-educated, i.e., at maximum pre-vocational secondary education, and higher educated adolescents and assessed whether the five-factor structure of the SDQ holds across educational levels. We also interviewed 24 low-educated adolescents, and 17 professionals. Results: On most SDQ subscales the low-educated adolescents had more problematic mean scores than the higher educated adolescents. Findings on the invariance factor analyses were inconsistent, with some measures showing a bad fit of the five factor model, and this occurring relatively more for the low-educated adolescents. Professionals and adolescents reported that the SDQ included difficult wordings. Discussion: Our findings imply that the scale structure of the SDQ-SR is slightly poorer for low educated adolescents. Given this caveat, psychometric properties of the SDQ-SR are generally sufficient for use, regardless of educational level.
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.