注意力缺陷多动障碍合并型和以注意力不集中为主的亚型的标准化观察评估。II.课堂观察。

IF 3 3区 心理学 Q1 Social Sciences School Psychology Review Pub Date : 2009-07-01
Stephanie H McConaughy, Masha Y Ivanova, Kevin Antshel, Ricardo B Eiraldi, Levent Dumenci
{"title":"注意力缺陷多动障碍合并型和以注意力不集中为主的亚型的标准化观察评估。II.课堂观察。","authors":"Stephanie H McConaughy, Masha Y Ivanova, Kevin Antshel, Ricardo B Eiraldi, Levent Dumenci","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Trained classroom observers used the Direct Observation Form (DOF; McConaughy & Achenbach, 2009) to rate observations of 163 6- to 11-year-old children in their school classrooms. Participants were assigned to four groups based on a parent diagnostic interview and parent and teacher rating scales: Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD)-Combined type (n = 64); ADHD-Inattentive type (n = 22); clinically referred without ADHD (n = 51); and nonreferred control children (n = 26). The ADHD-Combined group scored significantly higher than the referred without ADHD group and controls on the DOF Intrusive and Oppositional syndromes, Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Problems scale, Hyperactivity-Impulsivity subscale, and Total Problems; and significantly lower on the DOF On-Task score. The ADHD-Inattentive group scored significantly higher than controls on the DOF Sluggish Cognitive Tempo and Attention Problems syndromes, Inattention subscale, and Total Problems; and significantly lower on the DOF On-Task score. Implications are discussed regarding the discriminative validity of standardized classroom observations for identifying children with ADHD and differentiating between the two ADHD subtypes.</p>","PeriodicalId":21555,"journal":{"name":"School Psychology Review","volume":"38 3","pages":"362-381"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2009-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2929014/pdf/nihms227229.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Standardized Observational Assessment of Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder Combined and Predominantly Inattentive Subtypes. II. Classroom Observations.\",\"authors\":\"Stephanie H McConaughy, Masha Y Ivanova, Kevin Antshel, Ricardo B Eiraldi, Levent Dumenci\",\"doi\":\"\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Trained classroom observers used the Direct Observation Form (DOF; McConaughy & Achenbach, 2009) to rate observations of 163 6- to 11-year-old children in their school classrooms. Participants were assigned to four groups based on a parent diagnostic interview and parent and teacher rating scales: Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD)-Combined type (n = 64); ADHD-Inattentive type (n = 22); clinically referred without ADHD (n = 51); and nonreferred control children (n = 26). The ADHD-Combined group scored significantly higher than the referred without ADHD group and controls on the DOF Intrusive and Oppositional syndromes, Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Problems scale, Hyperactivity-Impulsivity subscale, and Total Problems; and significantly lower on the DOF On-Task score. The ADHD-Inattentive group scored significantly higher than controls on the DOF Sluggish Cognitive Tempo and Attention Problems syndromes, Inattention subscale, and Total Problems; and significantly lower on the DOF On-Task score. Implications are discussed regarding the discriminative validity of standardized classroom observations for identifying children with ADHD and differentiating between the two ADHD subtypes.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":21555,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"School Psychology Review\",\"volume\":\"38 3\",\"pages\":\"362-381\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2009-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2929014/pdf/nihms227229.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"School Psychology Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"Social Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"School Psychology Review","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

经过培训的课堂观察员使用直接观察表(DOF;McConaughy & Achenbach,2009 年)对 163 名 6-11 岁儿童在学校课堂的观察情况进行评分。根据家长诊断访谈以及家长和教师评分表,参与者被分配到四个组别:注意力缺陷多动障碍(ADHD)--综合型(n = 64);注意力缺陷多动障碍--注意力不集中型(n = 22);临床转诊的无 ADHD 儿童(n = 51);以及未转诊的对照组儿童(n = 26)。在DOF侵入和对立综合征、注意缺陷多动问题量表、多动-冲动分量表和总问题上,ADHD-合并组的得分明显高于无ADHD转诊组和对照组;而在DOF完成任务得分上,则明显低于无ADHD转诊组和对照组。多动症-注意力不集中组在DOF认知节奏迟缓和注意力问题量表、注意力不集中分量表和总问题上的得分明显高于对照组,而在DOF完成任务得分上则明显低于对照组。本文讨论了标准化课堂观察在识别多动症儿童和区分两种多动症亚型方面的鉴别有效性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Standardized Observational Assessment of Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder Combined and Predominantly Inattentive Subtypes. II. Classroom Observations.

Trained classroom observers used the Direct Observation Form (DOF; McConaughy & Achenbach, 2009) to rate observations of 163 6- to 11-year-old children in their school classrooms. Participants were assigned to four groups based on a parent diagnostic interview and parent and teacher rating scales: Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD)-Combined type (n = 64); ADHD-Inattentive type (n = 22); clinically referred without ADHD (n = 51); and nonreferred control children (n = 26). The ADHD-Combined group scored significantly higher than the referred without ADHD group and controls on the DOF Intrusive and Oppositional syndromes, Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Problems scale, Hyperactivity-Impulsivity subscale, and Total Problems; and significantly lower on the DOF On-Task score. The ADHD-Inattentive group scored significantly higher than controls on the DOF Sluggish Cognitive Tempo and Attention Problems syndromes, Inattention subscale, and Total Problems; and significantly lower on the DOF On-Task score. Implications are discussed regarding the discriminative validity of standardized classroom observations for identifying children with ADHD and differentiating between the two ADHD subtypes.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
School Psychology Review
School Psychology Review Social Sciences-Education
CiteScore
6.90
自引率
20.00%
发文量
54
期刊介绍: School Psychology Review (SPR) is a refereed journal published quarterly by NASP. Its primary purpose is to provide a means for communicating scholarly advances in research, training, and practice related to psychology and education, and specifically to school psychology. Of particular interest are articles presenting original, data-based research that can contribute to the development of innovative intervention and prevention strategies and the evaluation of these approaches. SPR presents important conceptual developments and empirical findings from a wide range of disciplines (e.g., educational, child clinical, pediatric, community.
期刊最新文献
A Model of Performative Racial Ally Behavior: Implications for School Psychology School Psychology Graduate Students’ Experiences with Ethical Dilemmas: Implications for Training and Practice Development of an Interdisciplinary Support Program for Early Career Women of Color in School-Based Mental Health Fields Posttraumatic Stress Symptoms in Middle School Students at-Risk for Aggressive Behavior: Examining the Role of Pandemic Exposure and Perceived Discrimination The Relationship between Intercoder Reliability of Data Extraction and Effect Measure Calculation in Single-Case Meta-Analysis
×
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