ArticleFrontiers in psychology2024
Psychometric properties of the Child and Adolescent PsychProfiler v5: a measure for screening 14 of the most common DSM-5 disorders.
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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: The Child and Adolescent PsychProfiler version 5 (CAPP v5, 2014) is a measure for screening 14 common DSM-5 disorders in children and adolescents. The separation of Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) and Specific Learning Disorder (SLD) by subtype results in 17 screening scales covering the 14 disorders. Theoretically then, the CAPP v5 should have a 17-factor structure, however, to date no published study has confirmed this. Additionally, there has been no comprehensive evaluation of the reliability and validity of the screening scales in this measure. These were examined across two different studies. Study 1 examined support for the 17-factor model of the parent-report version of the CAPP (CAPP-PRF) in a large group of adolescents from the general community. It also examined the internal consistency reliability and discriminant validity of the factors in this measure. Study 2 examined the validity of these factors in a clinic-referred group of adolescents. Methods: In Study 1, 951 parents completed the CAPP-PRF on behalf of their adolescents [mean (standard deviation) = 14.54 years (1.66 years)]. In Study 2, 173 parents completed the CAPP-PRF on behalf of their clinic-referred adolescent children [mean (standard deviation) = 14.5 years (1.84 years)]. Adolescents also completed a number of measures and tests for the purpose of assessing their behavior, IQ, and academic abilities. Results: The results in Study 1 supported a 17-factor model, and virtually all of the factors in this model showed acceptable reliability (alpha and omega coefficients), and discriminant validity. Study 2 demonstrated good support for the validity of the scales in the CAPP-PRF. Discussion: These findings indicate acceptable psychometric properties for the CAPP-PRF, and its utility for screening the more common DSM-5 disorders in children and adolescents.
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.