Please enable JavaScript.

Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.

comparison of procedure section, procedure + measures - Coggle Diagram

- - - - the difficulty of withholding medication to confirm
        ADHD-I symptoms
- - - - children clinically diagnosed with ADHD (85% combined presentation) aged 6-12 with primary care giver
      - n = 300
      - recruited from: inpatient 86% outpatient 14% clinical settings at time of admission/initial interview; high risk for developing comorbid symptoms
        
        admission to inpatient care inclusion:behaviors that were considered “harmful” to themselves or others such as; attempting to run from home or school, attempting to jump
        from a moving vehicle, or acting aggressively to a teacher.
  - - - (representative
        of a referred sample in ADHD; may be over represented based on present research suggesting equal gender distribution)
- - - - 72 boy and 69 girls
      - 61 w adhd : M = 39, F = 22
        
        symptoms M, SD inatention: 14.4 (5.3)
        hyper: 12.8 (6.3)
        conduct problems :3.3 (1.9)
        
        inclusion criteria:
        
        diagnosed with ADHD by a psychiatrist, neurologist, pediatrician,
        or a family doctor qualified to diagnose ADHD
        
        4th edition dsm-tr
        
        confirmed with Mothers completed the ADHD-IV Rating Scale
        
        well-validated measure reflecting
        the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders
        
        18 items, nine of which describe symptoms of inattention (e.g., “Has difficulty sustaining attention in tasks) and nine of which describe symptoms of hyperactivity–impulsivity (e.g., “Fidgets with hands or feet
        
        4 point likert scale; 0 never or rarley-3 very often
        
        included only if mothers indicated “often” or “very often” for at least six of the nine symptoms on either the inattentiveness or the hyperactive–impulsive scales
      - w/out adhd M = 33, F = 47
        
        Children included in the control group did not meet ADHD-IV Rating Scale
        rating criterion
    - - diagnosed with a developmental disability (e.g.,autism spectrum disorder, intellectual disability) or have a chronic health issue
- - - - Kiddie-Schedule for Affective Disorders
        and Schizophrenia (K-SADS;
      - least six items of inattention and/or hyperactivity/impulsivity endorsed by the parent
      - OR by the teacher on the
        CSI, using the “or” algorithm
      - demonstrate some peer problems
        
        Strengths and Difficulties
        Questionnaire Peer Problems subscale
        
        MOST had score of 3 = 1 SD above mean; reported by parent and teacher
        
        if parents did not endorse a 3, child revived score of 3 when using or algorithm
- - - - Parenting
        Scale ; assess
        dysfunctional parenting practices
        
        item consists of an ineffective parenting behavior paired with an
        effective counterpart to form high and low anchors; 7-point scale
        
        indicate their tendency to employ specific discipline strategies
        
        7 indicating a high probability dysfunctional; 1 high probability of using an effective
        
        two subscales,
        
        a
        lax parenting discipline subscale EX When my child does something I don’t like . . . ,” where 1 = I do something about it every time it happens and 7 = I often let it go)
        
        overreactive discipline subscale EX. “When my child misbehaves . . . ,” where 1 = I speak to him calmly and 7 = I raise my voice and yell;
        
        coefficient alphas; overreactive parenting and lax parenting scales were .70
        and .80,
  - - - conflict discussion task
        
        mother–
        child dyads...discussion on a topic...which they had recently argued or disagreed...try to reach
        a solution
        
        choose a discussion topic
        
        children and their
        mothers separately completed the Issues Checklist
        
        COMMON conflict topics, such as bedtime, fights with siblings, homework,
        and the use of electronics
        
        each topic, mothers
        and children indicate if a disagreement occured over the last month
        
        reports were compared by a research assistant; topic rated by both the mother and child as most conflictual
        was chosen for the first topic
        
        instructed to discuss the topic for a full 5 min w. goal of trying to resolve the conflict; at 4th min researcher indicated they had an additional minute to reach a solution
        
        Mothers’ behaviors were coded with the following coding
        schemes
        
        supportive parenting included: offering thoughtful comments, asking questions, providing
        explanations, and considering the child’s opinions and suggestions and giving positive
        reinforcement and emotional support
        
        parenting negativity: criticism,
        dismissive behavior, rejection of the child expression of negative affect
        
        Behavioral observations were
        recorded using the INTERACT 16.05 observational software by two trained research assistants; not aware of study hypotheses or about child ADHD diagnosis status
        
        Coding was done on a
        second-by-second basis; codes were mutually exclusive.
        
        total number of supportive and negative behaviors
        was calculated.
        
        overcome time differences in
        conflict discussions, we computed proportion scores; total number of negative behaviors and the total number of
        supportive behaviors was each divided by the total number of behaviors observed during the conflict and then multiplied by 100
        
        Interobserver agreement kappa coefficients (15 % of obvs ) ; .76 and .72 for
        negative and supportive behaviors, respectively
  - - - moms five-item Conduct Problem subscale of the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire
        
        assesses delinquent behaviors on a 3-point Likert-type scale ranging from 1 (not true) to 2 (somewhat true), and 3 (certainly
        true
      - psychometric properties
        of the SDQ are well established
        
        internal consistency was α = .64, much
        like previous studies
  - - - moms Parenting Distress subscale
        from the Parenting Stress Index–Short Form (PSI-SF
        
        12 items ex: “I feel that I cannot handle things"
        
        measuring
        the distress a parent feels in role
        
        5-point Likert-type; 0 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree)
        
        reliable and
        valid measure; internal consistency of the mothers’
        Parenting Distress scale was .81.
- - - - Attention Problems subscale of the Adult
        Self Report (ASR)
        
        measures behaviors and impairment
        related to inattention; 3-point scale ranging from “not
        true” to “very true or often true.”
        
        predictive V: 87%
        test-retest: 0.84
        concurrent
        validity with other ADHD symptom instruments: r=.47
        internal consistency: ASR: 🅰️ = .81;
      - ADHD DSM subscale
        of the Conners’ Adult ADHD Rating Scale (CAARS)
        
        4-point scale assessing symptoms
        ranging from “not at all, never” to “very much, very frequently,”; higher scores indicate greater severity
        
        predictive V: 87%
        test-retest: 0.88–0.91
        concurrent validity with other ADHD symptom instruments: r=.47
        internal consistency: ASR: 🅰️ = .85;
      - when measures concidered independently or composite the pattern nor interpretation of our findings changed
  - - - anxious/depressed syndrome subscale of the
        Adult Self Report
        
        measures symptoms and impairments related to anxiety and depression
        
        3-point scale from “not true” to “very true
        or often true.”
        
        high test–retest reliability (.87),
        concurrent validity with other anxiety and depression instruments (r = .69 with Beck Anxiety Inventory;r = .74 with Beck Depression Inventory),
        predictive validity (71%) for anxiety and depressive disorder diagnoses,
        internal consistency ( = .88;
  - - - 24-item parent-report
      - (assessing cognitive errors related to attributions of negative child behavior and parenting
        
        based on two measures of general cognitive errors: the Cognitive Error Questionnaire (Lefebvre, 1981) and Child Negative Cognitive Error Questionnaire (Leitenberg et al., 1986)
        
        test–retest
        validity of the Cognitive Error Questionnaire is .80
        
        test–retest validity of the Child Negative Cognitive
        Error Questionnaire is .65
        
        PCEQ consist of vignettes containing cognitive errors regarding parents’ own parenting practices and their child’s behavior
        
        5-point scale; 1 = “Almost exactly like I would think” to 5 = “Not at all like I
        would think,”; lower scores representing greater PCEs
        
        EX:
        
        Your child has done well with completing his/her morning routine all week. On Friday morning, your child has a meltdown while getting ready for school and the whole family is late. You think to yourself, ‘Wow, can’t my child ever get ready on time?’”
      - used in extant literature; shows expected relationship to parent psychopathology and positive/negative parenting beh
        high internal consistency w/ present sample ( = .90).
  - - - question: does using only subscales effect the relability or validity?
  - - - 160-item parent- and
        teacher-report
        
        externalizing problems composite score
        
        assesses hyperactivity,
        aggression, and conduct problems in children
        
        4-point scale ranging from “Never” to “Almost Always.” A beh. ocurs
        
        sufficient variability in externalizing behaviors to assess study questions, as 29% of the current sample exhibited externalizing behaviors greater than one standard deviation above the mean (T > 60).
        
        composite score of parent and teacher scores; assess externalizing
        behaviors cross-situationally.
        
        significantly correlated (p < .001).
        
        high test–retest reliability (teacherreport:.85, parent-report: .88), strong concurrent validity studies with several measures of child behavior (e.g., Impairment Rating Scale, r = .49), predictive validity for Oppositional Defiant and Conduct Disorder diagnoses (91%; Girio-Herrera et al., 2015), and strong internal consistency ( = .93; Reynolds & Kamphaus, 2004).
        
        question: is there a difference between internal consistency in present sample versus other article
      - information on the child’s
        problem and adaptive behaviors at home and in the community
- - - - correlation
        between parent and teacher was r(209) = 0.20, p =
        0.003, so composite of the two informants scores was
        created
        
        correlation is low in magnitude; combined informants increase confidence in the level of
        ADHD behaviors across contexts + reduce concerns
        about shared rater variance.
    - - assess the extent to which the child argues, has a temper,
        and is defiant
      - standardized, normed measures of school-age
        children’s problem behaviors ; widely-used and have established reliability and validity
      - 0= not true, 1= sometimes true,
        or 2= very true
      - composite used from T-scores of each five-item subscale
        
        parent and teacher report
        were significantly correlated, r(191)= 0.47, p < 0.001
  - - - four subscales: Involvement, Positive
        Parenting, Poor Monitoring/Supervision, and Inconsistent
        Discipline.
      - five-point metric from 0=
        Never to 4=Always.
      - nternal consistency of the subscales; moderate to high in previous research:
        Involvement=0.80, Positive Parenting=0.80+ Inconsistent
        Discipline=0.67, and Poor Monitoring/Supervision=0.67
      - Hurley et al. (2014) also report acceptable
        reliability, validity, and factor structure for this measure.
      - present sample: internal consistency was: Involvement=0.63,
        Positive Parenting=0.79, Inconsistent Discipline=0.66, and Poor Monitoring/Supervision=0.47 (which we elected to not
        use because of the low internal consistency
    - - Harvey et al.
        (2001) reported factor analytic evidence for these two subscales
        among children with and without ADHD.
      - presented with scenarios (e.g., When my child misbehaves…
        
        two possible responses; g., I do something about it right
        away or I do something about it later)
        
        indicate which
        response is more like them on a seven-point scale
      - adequate reliability, factor structure, and
        validity in previous research; present sample, internal consistency was: Over-Reactive=0.70 and
        Laxness=0.75
  - - - required cooperation
      - parent controlled the
        left knob and only the child
        controlled the right knob
      - 10 minutes to complete
      - recorded and then scored by two trained, independent
        coders
        
        Inter-rater reliability was assessed using intraclass
        correlation coefficients ICC
        
        Final
        scores on each dimension aRE avg from both coders
        
        Parent approval
        (ICC = 0.97)
        
        raw number of times that the
        parent encourages or praises the child’s action
        
        Parent
        engagement (ICC = 0.89)
        
        extent to which the
        parent engages and collaborates with the child
        
        global scale from 1 = Avoidance to 9 = Constant active
        engagement.
        
        Physical control of the child (ICC = 0.96)
        
        raw number of times the parent exerts physical
        control by restraining the child’s actions / interfering
        with the child’s knob
        
        parental criticism (ICC =
        0.96)
        
        raw number of times the parent makes a
        negative comment about the child or the child’s actions
- - - - parent-report measure of behavioral and emotional problems for children ages 6–18
        
        Question? take into account developmentally appropriate and inapprite beh for age norms considering the age range is so high?
      - two broad scales of
        child behavior:
        
        internalizing scale is comprised of three subscales—anxious/depressed, withdrawn/depressed, and somatic complains,
        
        externalizing scale is comprised of two
        subscales—rule breaking behavior and aggressive behavior.
      - T-scores are obtained based on age and gender,; 70 or higher falling in the clinically significant
        range; between 65 and 69 falling in the borderline
        clinically significant range
      - valid and reliable measure of internalizing and externalizing child behavior problems [63] across both non-clinical and clinical populations, including ADHD
  - - - no comment on scale range
      - higher
        scores indicating more child routines endorsed
  - - - five dimensions of parenting behavior—positive parenting, involvement, poor monitoring and supervision, inconsistent discipline, and corporal punishment. 5-point Likert scale ; higher = grater extent to which they engage in a particular behavior
        
        ex: higher score on positive parenting = greater endorsement of that beh;
        vs higher on maladaptive = greater endoresment of maladaptive parenting beh
      - “You have a friendly talk with your child”, “The punishment you give your child depends on your mood”, and “You ignore your child when he/she is misbehaving”