Clinical Utility and Predictive Validity of Parent and College Student Symptom Ratings in Predicting an ADHD Diagnosis

2016 ◽  
Vol 72 (4) ◽  
pp. 401-418 ◽  
Author(s):  
Melissa R. Dvorsky ◽  
Joshua M. Langberg ◽  
Stephen J. Molitor ◽  
Elizaveta Bourchtein
Keyword(s):  
College Student ◽  
Predictive Validity ◽  
Clinical Utility ◽  
Adhd Diagnosis ◽  
Symptom Ratings

scholarly journals Integration of symptom ratings from multiple informants in ADHD diagnosis: A psychometric model with clinical utility.

2015 ◽  
Vol 27 (3) ◽  
pp. 1060-1071 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michelle M. Martel ◽  
Ulrich Schimmack ◽  
Molly Nikolas ◽  
Joel T. Nigg
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Utility ◽  
Multiple Informants ◽  
Adhd Diagnosis ◽  
Symptom Ratings ◽  
Psychometric Model

scholarly journals Psychometric properties of gross motor assessment tools for children: a systematic review

BMJ Open ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 8 (10) ◽  
pp. e021734 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alison Griffiths ◽  
Rachel Toovey ◽  
Prue E Morgan ◽  
Alicia J Spittle
Keyword(s):  
Psychometric Properties ◽  
Predictive Validity ◽  
Methodological Quality ◽  
Clinical Utility ◽  
Assessment Tools ◽  
Motor Assessment ◽  
Gross Motor ◽  
Retest Reliability ◽  
Validity Test ◽  
Test Retest Reliability

ObjectiveGross motor assessment tools have a critical role in identifying, diagnosing and evaluating motor difficulties in childhood. The objective of this review was to systematically evaluate the psychometric properties and clinical utility of gross motor assessment tools for children aged 2–12 years.MethodA systematic search of MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL and AMED was performed between May and July 2017. Methodological quality was assessed with the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health status Measurement INstruments checklist and an outcome measures rating form was used to evaluate reliability, validity and clinical utility of assessment tools.ResultsSeven assessment tools from 37 studies/manuals met the inclusion criteria: Bayley Scale of Infant and Toddler Development-III (Bayley-III), Bruininks-Oseretsky Test of Motor Proficiency-2 (BOT-2), Movement Assessment Battery for Children-2 (MABC-2), McCarron Assessment of Neuromuscular Development (MAND), Neurological Sensory Motor Developmental Assessment (NSMDA), Peabody Developmental Motor Scales-2 (PDMS-2) and Test of Gross Motor Development-2 (TGMD-2). Methodological quality varied from poor to excellent. Validity and internal consistency varied from fair to excellent (α=0.5–0.99). The Bayley-III, NSMDA and MABC-2 have evidence of predictive validity. Test–retest reliability is excellent in the BOT-2 (intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC)=0.80–0.99), PDMS-2 (ICC=0.97), MABC-2 (ICC=0.83–0.96) and TGMD-2 (ICC=0.81–0.92). TGMD-2 has the highest inter-rater (ICC=0.88–0.93) and intrarater reliability (ICC=0.92–0.99).ConclusionsThe majority of gross motor assessments for children have good-excellent validity. Test–retest reliability is highest in the BOT-2, MABC-2, PDMS-2 and TGMD-2. The Bayley-III has the best predictive validity at 2 years of age for later motor outcome. None of the assessment tools demonstrate good evaluative validity. Further research on evaluative gross motor assessment tools are urgently needed.

scholarly journals The Clinical Utility of Personality Profiles of High-Risk Offenders in Rehabilitation

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
◽  
Morgan K.A. Sissons
Keyword(s):  
Cluster Analysis ◽  
High Risk ◽  
Personality Disorders ◽  
Predictive Validity ◽  
Clinical Relevance ◽  
Clinical Utility ◽  
Self Report ◽  
Offender Rehabilitation ◽  
Criminal Recidivism ◽  
Self Presentation

<p>Personality disorders are common among high-risk offenders. These disorders may have relevance for their risk of offending, and they are likely to present barriers to their engagement in rehabilitation programmes. Co-morbidity between personality disorders - and the high frequency of clinical disorders in general - in offender samples complicate research on personality disorder in offender rehabilitation. One approach to understanding this heterogeneity is to use cluster analysis (CA). CA is an empirical strategy which is used to identify subgroups (clusters) of individuals who have similar scores on the variables used in the analysis. It has been used to empirically identify different patterns of personality and clinical psychopathology among incarcerated offenders. Two profiles frequently emerge in cluster analytic research on offender psychopathology profiles: an antisocial/narcissistic profile and a high-psychopathology profile. However, previous research has not empirically examined whether the identification of these profiles has clinical relevance for offender rehabilitation; that is, whether the profiles are simply descriptive, or whether they can provide useful information for the management and rehabilitation of offenders.  In the current research, I used data collected from high risk offenders entering prison-based rehabilitation programmes to investigate the clinical utility of psychopathology clusters. Using a self-report measure of personality and clinical psychopathology - the Millon Clinical Multiaxial Inventory III - I identified three clusters: a low-psychopathology cluster (26% of the sample), a high-psychopathology cluster (35% of the sample), and an antisocial/narcissistic cluster (39% of the sample). The high-psychopathology and antisocial/narcissistic clusters in particular resembled high risk clusters found in previous research.  To determine whether the three clusters had clinical relevance, I investigated cluster differences in criminal risk, treatment responsivity, and self-report predictive validity. I found evidence for cluster differences in criminal risk: men in the high-psychopathology and antisocial/narcissistic clusters had higher rates of criminal recidivism after release compared to men in the low-psychopathology cluster. However, I found that regardless of psychopathology, men in all three clusters made progress in treatment, and there was little evidence that clusters that reported more psychopathology were less engaged, or made less progress. In the final study I examined cluster differences in self-presentation style and the predictive validity of self-report. Results indicated that offenders who reported high levels of psychopathology had a more general tendency for negative self-presentation, and their self-report on risk-related measures was highly predictive of criminal recidivism.  Combined, the results of this research show that cluster analysis of self-reported psychopathology can generate a parsimonious model of heterogeneity in offender samples. Importantly, the resulting clusters can also provide information for some of the most important tasks in offender management: assessment and treatment. The results suggest the highest risk offenders tend to report higher levels of psychopathology, and that offenders who report extensive psychopathology also have highly predictive risk-related self-report. Perhaps one of the most reassuring findings of the current research is that even offenders who report high levels of psychopathology appear to benefit from rehabilitation.</p>

scholarly journals The Clinical Utility of Personality Profiles of High-Risk Offenders in Rehabilitation

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
◽  
Morgan K.A. Sissons
Keyword(s):  
Cluster Analysis ◽  
High Risk ◽  
Personality Disorders ◽  
Predictive Validity ◽  
Clinical Relevance ◽  
Clinical Utility ◽  
Self Report ◽  
Offender Rehabilitation ◽  
Criminal Recidivism ◽  
Self Presentation

<p>Personality disorders are common among high-risk offenders. These disorders may have relevance for their risk of offending, and they are likely to present barriers to their engagement in rehabilitation programmes. Co-morbidity between personality disorders - and the high frequency of clinical disorders in general - in offender samples complicate research on personality disorder in offender rehabilitation. One approach to understanding this heterogeneity is to use cluster analysis (CA). CA is an empirical strategy which is used to identify subgroups (clusters) of individuals who have similar scores on the variables used in the analysis. It has been used to empirically identify different patterns of personality and clinical psychopathology among incarcerated offenders. Two profiles frequently emerge in cluster analytic research on offender psychopathology profiles: an antisocial/narcissistic profile and a high-psychopathology profile. However, previous research has not empirically examined whether the identification of these profiles has clinical relevance for offender rehabilitation; that is, whether the profiles are simply descriptive, or whether they can provide useful information for the management and rehabilitation of offenders.  In the current research, I used data collected from high risk offenders entering prison-based rehabilitation programmes to investigate the clinical utility of psychopathology clusters. Using a self-report measure of personality and clinical psychopathology - the Millon Clinical Multiaxial Inventory III - I identified three clusters: a low-psychopathology cluster (26% of the sample), a high-psychopathology cluster (35% of the sample), and an antisocial/narcissistic cluster (39% of the sample). The high-psychopathology and antisocial/narcissistic clusters in particular resembled high risk clusters found in previous research.  To determine whether the three clusters had clinical relevance, I investigated cluster differences in criminal risk, treatment responsivity, and self-report predictive validity. I found evidence for cluster differences in criminal risk: men in the high-psychopathology and antisocial/narcissistic clusters had higher rates of criminal recidivism after release compared to men in the low-psychopathology cluster. However, I found that regardless of psychopathology, men in all three clusters made progress in treatment, and there was little evidence that clusters that reported more psychopathology were less engaged, or made less progress. In the final study I examined cluster differences in self-presentation style and the predictive validity of self-report. Results indicated that offenders who reported high levels of psychopathology had a more general tendency for negative self-presentation, and their self-report on risk-related measures was highly predictive of criminal recidivism.  Combined, the results of this research show that cluster analysis of self-reported psychopathology can generate a parsimonious model of heterogeneity in offender samples. Importantly, the resulting clusters can also provide information for some of the most important tasks in offender management: assessment and treatment. The results suggest the highest risk offenders tend to report higher levels of psychopathology, and that offenders who report extensive psychopathology also have highly predictive risk-related self-report. Perhaps one of the most reassuring findings of the current research is that even offenders who report high levels of psychopathology appear to benefit from rehabilitation.</p>

Predictive validity and clinical utility of DSM-5 Somatic Symptom Disorder: Prospective 1-year follow-up study

2013 ◽  
Vol 75 (4) ◽  
pp. 358-361 ◽  
Author(s):  
Katharina Voigt ◽  
Eileen Wollburg ◽  
Nina Weinmann ◽  
Annabel Herzog ◽  
Björn Meyer ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Predictive Validity ◽  
Clinical Utility ◽  
Somatic Symptom ◽  
Somatic Symptom Disorder ◽  
Follow Up Study ◽  
Dsm 5
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document