Multimodal Assessment of Emotion Dysregulation in Children with and without ADHD and Disruptive Behavior Disorders.

IF 4.2 1区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL Journal of Clinical Child and Adolescent Psychology Pub Date : 2024-05-01 Epub Date: 2024-01-25 DOI:10.1080/15374416.2024.2303706
Melissa L Hernandez, Alexis M Garcia, Jamie A Spiegel, Anthony S Dick, Paulo A Graziano
{"title":"Multimodal Assessment of Emotion Dysregulation in Children with and without ADHD and Disruptive Behavior Disorders.","authors":"Melissa L Hernandez, Alexis M Garcia, Jamie A Spiegel, Anthony S Dick, Paulo A Graziano","doi":"10.1080/15374416.2024.2303706","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>We sought to explore if specific domains of emotion dysregulation (emotion regulation [EREG], emotional reactivity/lability [EREL], emotion recognition/understanding [ERU], and callous-unemotional [CU] behaviors) were uniquely associated with diagnostic classifications.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>This study utilized a multimodal (parent/teacher [P/T] reports and behavioral observations) approach to examine emotion dysregulation in a sample of young children (68.7% boys; mean age = 5.47, SD = 0.77, 81.4% Latinx) with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD Only; <i>n</i> = 46), ADHD + disruptive behavior disorders (ADHD+DBD; <i>n</i> = 129), and typically developing (TD) children (<i>n</i> = 148).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>All three diagnostic groups were significantly different from one another on P/T reports of EREG, EREL and CU. For the ADHD+DBD group, P/T reported worse EREG and EREL, and higher mean scores of CU, compared to both ADHD Only and TD groups. The ADHD+DBD group also performed significantly worse than the TD group (but not the ADHD Only group) on observed measures of EREG, EREL and ERU. P/T reported EREG, EREL and CU for the ADHD Only group were significantly worse than the TD group. Using multinomial logistic regression, P/T reported EREG, EREL, and CU were significantly associated with diagnostic status above and beyond observed measures of emotion dysregulation. The model successfully classified children with ADHD+DBD (91.3%) and TD (95.9%); however, children in the ADHD Only group were correctly identified only 45.7% of time.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Our findings suggest that measures of emotion dysregulation may be particularly helpful in correctly identifying children with ADHD+DBD, but not necessarily children with ADHD Only.</p>","PeriodicalId":48350,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Clinical Child and Adolescent Psychology","volume":" ","pages":"444-459"},"PeriodicalIF":4.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11192619/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Clinical Child and Adolescent Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/15374416.2024.2303706","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/25 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: We sought to explore if specific domains of emotion dysregulation (emotion regulation [EREG], emotional reactivity/lability [EREL], emotion recognition/understanding [ERU], and callous-unemotional [CU] behaviors) were uniquely associated with diagnostic classifications.

Method: This study utilized a multimodal (parent/teacher [P/T] reports and behavioral observations) approach to examine emotion dysregulation in a sample of young children (68.7% boys; mean age = 5.47, SD = 0.77, 81.4% Latinx) with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD Only; n = 46), ADHD + disruptive behavior disorders (ADHD+DBD; n = 129), and typically developing (TD) children (n = 148).

Results: All three diagnostic groups were significantly different from one another on P/T reports of EREG, EREL and CU. For the ADHD+DBD group, P/T reported worse EREG and EREL, and higher mean scores of CU, compared to both ADHD Only and TD groups. The ADHD+DBD group also performed significantly worse than the TD group (but not the ADHD Only group) on observed measures of EREG, EREL and ERU. P/T reported EREG, EREL and CU for the ADHD Only group were significantly worse than the TD group. Using multinomial logistic regression, P/T reported EREG, EREL, and CU were significantly associated with diagnostic status above and beyond observed measures of emotion dysregulation. The model successfully classified children with ADHD+DBD (91.3%) and TD (95.9%); however, children in the ADHD Only group were correctly identified only 45.7% of time.

Conclusion: Our findings suggest that measures of emotion dysregulation may be particularly helpful in correctly identifying children with ADHD+DBD, but not necessarily children with ADHD Only.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
多模式评估多动症和破坏性行为障碍儿童的情绪失调。
目的我们试图探究情绪失调的特定领域(情绪调节[EREG]、情绪反应性/易变性[EREL]、情绪识别/理解[ERU]和冷漠-非情绪化[CU]行为)是否与诊断分类独特相关:本研究采用多模态(家长/教师[P/T]报告和行为观察)方法,对患有注意力缺陷/多动症(ADHD Only;n = 46)、注意力缺陷/多动症+破坏性行为障碍(ADHD+DBD;n = 129)和发育正常(TD)儿童(n = 148)的幼儿(68.7%为男孩;平均年龄 = 5.47,SD = 0.77,81.4%为拉丁裔)进行情绪失调抽样调查:所有三个诊断组在EREG、EREL和CU的P/T报告上都有显著差异。与单纯多动症组和TD组相比,ADHD+DBD组的P/T报告的EREG和EREL较差,CU的平均分较高。在EREG、EREL和ERU的观察指标上,ADHD+DBD组的表现也明显差于TD组(而非单纯ADHD组)。仅有多动症组的EREG、EREL和CU的P/T报告明显差于TD组。通过多项式逻辑回归,P/T报告的EREG、EREL和CU与诊断状态的相关性明显高于观察到的情绪失调测量值。该模型成功地对ADHD+DBD(91.3%)和TD(95.9%)儿童进行了分类;然而,仅ADHD组儿童被正确识别的比例仅为45.7%:我们的研究结果表明,情绪失调的测量方法可能特别有助于正确识别患有 ADHD+DBD 的儿童,但不一定有助于正确识别仅患有 ADHD 的儿童。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
9.70
自引率
4.80%
发文量
58
期刊介绍: The Journal of Clinical Child and Adolescent Psychology (JCCAP) is the official journal for the Society of Clinical Child and Adolescent Psychology, American Psychological Association. It publishes original contributions on the following topics: (a) the development and evaluation of assessment and intervention techniques for use with clinical child and adolescent populations; (b) the development and maintenance of clinical child and adolescent problems; (c) cross-cultural and sociodemographic issues that have a clear bearing on clinical child and adolescent psychology in terms of theory, research, or practice; and (d) training and professional practice in clinical child and adolescent psychology, as well as child advocacy.
期刊最新文献
Racial Discrimination and Trauma Symptoms Among Black Adolescent-Caregiver Dyads. Negative Urgency and Lack of Perseverance Predict Suicidal Ideation and Attempts Among Young Adolescents. Dialectical Behavior Therapy Programming for Adolescents: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Clinical and Implementation Outcomes. Adolescent Client and Clinician Predictors of Measurement-Based Care Fidelity in Community Mental Health Settings. Evidence-Base Update of Psychosocial and Combination Treatments for Child and Adolescent Depression.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1