Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40549273›Full record

ArticleJournal of patient-reported outcomes2025

Internal consistency and structural validity of the parent-report preschool (2-4 years) Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire in 1-year-old children.

Sarah L Blower, Kate E Mooney, Nicole Gridley, Fionnuala Larkin, Tracey J Bywater, G J Melendez-Torres

Abstract readValidation Study
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of patient-reported outcomes, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

6 authors.

Sarah L BlowerDepartment of Health Sciences, Seebohm Rowntree Building, University of York, York, YO10 5DD, UK. sarah.blower@york.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9168-9995
Kate E MooneyDepartment of Health Sciences, Seebohm Rowntree Building, University of York, York, YO10 5DD, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4231-1643
Nicole GridleyCarnegie School of Education, Carnegie Hall, 222, Headingley Campus, Leeds Beckett University, Leeds, LS1 3HE, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1881-5502
Fionnuala LarkinSchool of Applied Psychology, University College Cork, Cork Enterprise Centre, North Mall, Cork, Ireland.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3838-9165
Tracey J BywaterDepartment of Health Sciences, Seebohm Rowntree Building, University of York, York, YO10 5DD, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7207-8753
G J Melendez-TorresUniversity of Exeter Medical School, South Cloisters, University of Exeter, St Luke's Campus, Heavitree Road, Exeter, EX1 2LU, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9823-4790

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPrevention and early intervention are key to addressing poor child mental health. Systematic reviews have highlighted a lack of brief, valid and reliable outcome measures that can be implemented in both research and practice to assess social, emotional and behavioural outcomes in the early years. The Preschool Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (2-4 years) is a promising candidate to fill this gap, but the measurement properties of this tool are not yet known in very young children.

methodsA secondary data analysis of two clinical trial datasets was conducted to examine the internal consistency reliability and structural validity of the parent-report English preschool version of the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire in a sample of 505 infants with mean average age of 18 months (SD .81). The measure was designed for children aged 2-4 years and was not modified prior to use with 1-year-olds in this study. Structural validity was examined in two Confirmatory Factor Analyses (CFA) testing two-factor and five-factor models (representing factor structures proposed by the developers of SDQ), and McDonald's coefficient Omega was estimated for each subscale with values > .70 considered acceptable.

resultsThe model fit values for the two-factor model demonstrated a poor fit to the data (X DISCUSSION: We concluded that the measure has poor internal consistency and lacks structural validity in this very young age group. Further research to adapt the SDQ in order to improve content and face validity is recommended prior to any further psychometric analyses with this very young age group. The paucity of robust and practical outcome measures of early social, emotional and behavioural poses significant challenges to the early identification of need and evaluation of interventions.

Indexed as

ParentsChild, PreschoolFactor Analysis, StatisticalFemaleHumansInfantMalePsychometricsReproducibility of ResultsSurveys and Questionnaires

Identifiers

PMID40549273
PMCPMC12185824

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.