Validity of the Brief Child and Family Phone Interview by comparison with Longitudinal Expert All Data diagnoses in outpatients.

IF 1.4 Q3 PSYCHIATRY Scandinavian Journal of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry and Psychology Pub Date : 2020-10-18 eCollection Date: 2018-01-01 DOI:10.21307/sjcapp-2018-009
Markus Andersson, Martin Bäckström, Tord Ivarsson, Maria Råstam, Håkan Jarbin
{"title":"Validity of the Brief Child and Family Phone Interview by comparison with Longitudinal Expert All Data diagnoses in outpatients.","authors":"Markus Andersson,&nbsp;Martin Bäckström,&nbsp;Tord Ivarsson,&nbsp;Maria Råstam,&nbsp;Håkan Jarbin","doi":"10.21307/sjcapp-2018-009","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The Brief Child and Family Phone Interview (BCFPI) is a standardized intake and follow-up interview used in child and adolescent mental health services (CAMHS). Although it has shown good validity compared with other measures using parent reports, it has not yet been compared with diagnoses derived from a Longitudinal Expert All Data (LEAD) procedure, which includes information from separate diagnostic interviews with parent(s) and child. The aim was to compare the BCFPI evaluation in an outpatient child and adolescent psychiatry setting with an evaluation derived from a LEAD procedure.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>At four Swedish outpatient CAMHS, 267 patients were interviewed at intake with the BCFPI. Within six weeks, patients and parents were interviewed separately with the 2009 version of the semi-structured Kiddie Schedule for Affective Disorders and Schizophrenia for School-age Children, Present and Lifetime Version (K-SADS-PL) and parents completed the Child Behavior Checklist (CBCL). LEAD diagnoses were subsequently determined by two senior clinicians based on 1.2 years of clinical records including the K-SADS-PL and ensuing information from further assessments, psychological tests, information from teachers and other informants as well as treatment outcome. The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders subscales from the CBCL and the subscales from the BCFPI were compared with LEAD diagnoses. These measured symptoms of attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder, oppositional defiant disorder, conduct disorder, separation anxiety disorder, generalized anxiety disorder, and major depressive disorder.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The criterion validity for BCFPI versus LEAD diagnoses was fair for oppositional defiant disorder (area under curve, 0.73), generalized anxiety disorder (0.73) and major depressive disorder (0.78), good for attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (0.81) and conduct disorder (0.83), and excellent for separation anxiety disorder (0.90). The screening properties of BCFPI and CBCL were similar.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The BCFPI is a concise and valid tool, performed along with the larger and more established CBCL, in screening for major psychiatric disorders. It is well suited as an intake interview in CAMHS.</p>","PeriodicalId":42655,"journal":{"name":"Scandinavian Journal of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry and Psychology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2020-10-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/65/bc/sjcapp-6-2-083.PMC7703845.pdf","citationCount":"5","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Scandinavian Journal of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry and Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.21307/sjcapp-2018-009","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2018/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5

Abstract

Background: The Brief Child and Family Phone Interview (BCFPI) is a standardized intake and follow-up interview used in child and adolescent mental health services (CAMHS). Although it has shown good validity compared with other measures using parent reports, it has not yet been compared with diagnoses derived from a Longitudinal Expert All Data (LEAD) procedure, which includes information from separate diagnostic interviews with parent(s) and child. The aim was to compare the BCFPI evaluation in an outpatient child and adolescent psychiatry setting with an evaluation derived from a LEAD procedure.

Methods: At four Swedish outpatient CAMHS, 267 patients were interviewed at intake with the BCFPI. Within six weeks, patients and parents were interviewed separately with the 2009 version of the semi-structured Kiddie Schedule for Affective Disorders and Schizophrenia for School-age Children, Present and Lifetime Version (K-SADS-PL) and parents completed the Child Behavior Checklist (CBCL). LEAD diagnoses were subsequently determined by two senior clinicians based on 1.2 years of clinical records including the K-SADS-PL and ensuing information from further assessments, psychological tests, information from teachers and other informants as well as treatment outcome. The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders subscales from the CBCL and the subscales from the BCFPI were compared with LEAD diagnoses. These measured symptoms of attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder, oppositional defiant disorder, conduct disorder, separation anxiety disorder, generalized anxiety disorder, and major depressive disorder.

Results: The criterion validity for BCFPI versus LEAD diagnoses was fair for oppositional defiant disorder (area under curve, 0.73), generalized anxiety disorder (0.73) and major depressive disorder (0.78), good for attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (0.81) and conduct disorder (0.83), and excellent for separation anxiety disorder (0.90). The screening properties of BCFPI and CBCL were similar.

Conclusion: The BCFPI is a concise and valid tool, performed along with the larger and more established CBCL, in screening for major psychiatric disorders. It is well suited as an intake interview in CAMHS.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

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
简短的儿童和家庭电话访谈与纵向专家所有数据诊断在门诊患者中的有效性比较。
背景:儿童和家庭简短电话访谈(BCFPI)是一种用于儿童和青少年心理健康服务(CAMHS)的标准化的入院和随访访谈。尽管与使用家长报告的其他测量方法相比,它显示出良好的有效性,但尚未与纵向专家所有数据(LEAD)程序得出的诊断结果进行比较,该程序包括来自父母和孩子单独诊断访谈的信息。目的是比较门诊儿童和青少年精神病学设置的BCFPI评估与来自LEAD程序的评估。方法:在四个瑞典门诊CAMHS, 267例患者在入院时接受BCFPI访谈。在6周内,患者和家长分别接受2009年版学龄儿童情感障碍和精神分裂症半结构化儿童时间表,现在和终身版(k - sds - pl)和家长完成儿童行为检查表(CBCL)的访谈。随后由两名高级临床医生根据1.2年的临床记录(包括K-SADS-PL)和随后的进一步评估、心理测试、教师和其他信息提供者的信息以及治疗结果确定铅诊断。将CBCL和BCFPI的精神障碍诊断与统计手册的子量表与铅诊断进行比较。这些测量的症状包括注意缺陷多动障碍、对立违抗障碍、行为障碍、分离焦虑障碍、广泛性焦虑障碍和重度抑郁症。结果:BCFPI对对立违抗性障碍(曲线下面积0.73)、广泛性焦虑障碍(0.73)、重性抑郁障碍(0.78)的诊断效度较好,对注意缺陷多动障碍(0.81)、品行障碍(0.83)的诊断效度较好,对分离性焦虑障碍(0.90)的诊断效度较好。BCFPI和CBCL的筛选性能相似。结论:BCFPI是一种简洁有效的工具,可与更大、更成熟的CBCL一起用于筛查重大精神疾病。它非常适合作为CAMHS的入学面试。
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
自引率
5.30%
发文量
12
审稿时长
8 weeks
期刊最新文献
Psychometric Properties of the Arabic Vanderbilt Children's ADHD Diagnostic Rating Scale (VADRS-A) in a Saudi Population Sample. Dealing with overwhelming life situations - young people's experiences of becoming depressed. Digital Psychosocial Follow-up for Childhood Critical Illness Survivors: A Qualitative Interview Study on Health Professionals' Perspectives. The Critical Role of Attachment Theory in Child and Adolescent Mental Health Care. Coping Styles and Defense Mechanisms Mediate Associations Between Exposure to Adverse Childhood Experiences and CPTSD Symptoms in Faroese Adolescents.
×
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