ArticleJournal of child psychology and psychiatry, and allied disciplines2025
Optimization of self- or parent-reported psychiatric phenotypes in longitudinal studies.
Article in Journal of child psychology and psychiatry, and allied disciplines, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- What we have learned about adolescent mental health and where we are going after a decade with the Adolescent Brain Cognitive Development Study.Developmental cognitive neuroscience · 2026Review
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
Abstract
backgroundThe Adolescent Brain Cognitive Development (ABCD) study is a longitudinal study of US adolescents with a wide breadth of psychiatric, neuroimaging and genetic data that can be leveraged to better understand psychiatric diseases. The reliability and validity of the psychiatric data collected have not yet been examined. This study aims to explore and optimize the reliability/validity of psychiatric diagnostic constructs in the ABCD study.
methodsParent-and-child-reported psychiatric data for 11,876 children (aged 9.5 ± 0.5 at first assessment) were examined over 4 years to derive specific constructs for psychiatric diagnoses using longitudinal information. Rates of psychiatric disorders were calculated and compared to those reported in the epidemiological literature.
resultsThe rates of self-reported psychiatric disorders at any single time point (broad diagnostic construct) were higher than indicated by epidemiological studies. Narrow diagnostic constructs, which required the endorsement of psychiatric disorders at a majority of longitudinal assessments, demonstrated a better rate approximation of literature-reported prevalences for most disorders (e.g. the prevalence of broad obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) was 13.3% compared to narrow OCD at 2.6% and a literature-reported prevalence of 2.3%). Analysis of comorbidity, using OCD as a representative example, also showed a better approximation of literature-reported comorbidity rates using the narrow construct, with some exceptions.
conclusionsSelf- or parent-report-based assessments tend to overestimate prevalences of psychiatric disorders in the ABCD Study, particularly when longitudinal data are summed to create lifetime prevalences. Such assessments should be accompanied by more in-depth assessments or clinician-administered structured interviews if using data where accurate disorder classifications are paramount.
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.