Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40134290›Full record

ArticleThe British journal of psychiatry : the journal of mental science2026

The extent to which child- and parent-report Revised Children's Anxiety and Depression Scale, short Mood and Feeling Questionnaire, Strength and Difficulty Questionnaire and child-report KIDSCREEN identify the same young people as at risk of mental health conditions.

Nazneen Nazeer, Jenny Parker, Lauren Cross, Sophie Epstein, Jessica Penhallow, Tamsin Newlove-Delgado, Johnny Downs, Tamsin Ford

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The British journal of psychiatry : the journal of mental science, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Nazneen Nazeer *Department of Psychiatry, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1212-1016
Jenny ParkerDepartment of Psychiatry, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0002-8605-9988
Lauren CrossDepartment of Psychiatry, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9144-5317
Sophie EpsteinChild and Adolescent Mental Health Services, South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2118-908X
Jessica PenhallowDepartment of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry and Child and Adolescent Lead, Centre for Translational Informatics, King's College London, London, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4951-7874
Tamsin Newlove-DelgadoCollege of Medicine and Health, University of Exeter, Exeter, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5192-3724
Johnny DownsChild and Adolescent Mental Health Services, South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8061-295X
Tamsin FordDepartment of Psychiatry, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5295-4904

Funding

Medical Research Council MR/V027751/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWe rely heavily on cut-off points of brief measures of psychological distress in research and clinical practice to identify those at risk of mental health conditions; however, few studies have compared the performance of different scales.

aimTo determine the extent to which the child- and parent-report Strength and Difficulty Questionnaire (SDQ), Revised Children's Anxiety and Depression Scale (RCADS), short Mood and Feeling Questionnaire (sMFQ) and child-report KIDSCREEN correlated and identified the same respondents above cut-off points and at risk of mental health conditions.

methodA cross-sectional survey was conducted among 231 children aged 11-16 years and 289 parents who completed all the above measures administered via a mobile app, MyJournE, including the SDQ, RCADS and sMFQ.

resultsThe psychopathology measures identified similar proportions of young people as above the cut-off point and at risk of depression (child report 14.7% RCADS, 19.9% sMFQ, parent report 8.7% RCADS, 12.1% sMFQ), anxiety (child report 24.7% RCADS, 26.0% SDQ-Emotional subscale, parent report 20.1% RCADS, 26% SDQ-Emotional subscale) and child-report internalising problems (26.8% RCADS, 29.9% SDQ). Despite strong correlations between measures (child report 0.77-0.84 and parent report 0.70-0.80 between the SDQ, sMFQ and RCADS) and expected directions of correlation with KIDSCREEN and SDQ subscales, kappa values indicate moderate to substantial agreement between measures. Measures did not consistently identify the same children; half (

conclusionThis study highlights the risk of using a screening test to 'rule out' potential psychopathology. Screening tests should not be used diagnostically and are best used together with broad assessment.

Indexed as

AnxietyDepressionParentsPsychiatric Status Rating ScalesAdolescentChildCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHumansMalePsychometricsSurveys and QuestionnairesCorrelationKIDSCREENRevised Children’s Anxiety and Depression Scaleshort Mood and Feeling QuestionnaireStrength and Difficulty Questionnaire

Identifiers

PMID40134290
PMCPMC7617555

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.