Article

Screening for DSM-IV externalizing disorders with the Child Behavior Checklist: A receiver-operating characteristic analysis

University of Denver, Denver, Colorado, United States
Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry (Impact Factor: 6.46). 11/2004; 45(7):1299-307. DOI: 10.1111/j.1469-7610.2004.00314.x
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT

This study examines the diagnostic accuracy of the CBCL syndrome AS scales for predicting DSM-IV Attention Deficit-Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) and Oppositional Defiant Disorder with or without Conduct Disorder (ODD/CD).
The sample included 370 children (187 probands and 183 siblings) participating in a family genetic study of attention and aggressive behavior problems. Univariate and stepwise logistic regression analyses were used to derive models for predicting two diagnostic conditions: ADHD and ODD/CD.
The Attention Problems syndrome significantly predicted ADHD, and ODD/CD was significantly predicted by the Aggressive Behavior syndrome. Both scales demonstrated good diagnostic accuracy, as assessed through receiver operating characteristics analyses. Cut-point analyses confirmed the utility of low T-scores, 55 on the respective syndromes, for efficiently discriminating cases from noncases.
CBCL syndromes display good diagnostic efficiency for assessing common externalizing disorders in children.

Download full-text

Full-text

Available from: Martha Wadsworth
  • Source
    • "Of 73 randomized participants, 56 completed the study (Fig. 1). Exclusion criteria were major untreated medical conditions (e.g., hypertension, diabetes), untreated Axis-I psychiatric disorders except substance abuse and dependence based on DSM-IV-TR criteria (Hudziak et al., 1993, 2004), use of any psychoactive drug other than caffeine and/or nicotine >4 times per week, daily alcohol consumption, or any condition associated with significant cognitive impairment (e.g., history of severe head trauma, HIV, ADHD). Participants without sufficient capacity to complete training and/or assessment (based on Shipley Institute of Living Scale estimated IQ and staff judgment) were also excluded (Zachary et al., 1985). "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Objective: Working memory impairment in individuals with chronic opioid dependence can play a major role in cognitive and treatment outcomes. Cognitive training targeting working memory shows promise for improved function in substance use disorders. To date, cognitive training has not been incorporated as an adjunctive treatment for opioid dependence. Methods: Methadone maintenance patients were randomly assigned to experimental (n=28) or active control (n=28) 25-session computerized training and run in parallel. Cognitive and drug use outcomes were assessed before and after training. Results: Participants in the experimental condition showed performance improvements on two of four working memory measures, and both groups improved on a third measure of working memory performance. Less frequent drug use was found in the experimental group than in the control group post-training. In contrast to previous findings with stimulant users, no significant effect of working memory training on delay discounting was found using either hypothetical or real rewards. There were no group differences on working memory outcome measures that were dissimilar from the training tasks, suggesting that another mechanism (e.g., increased distress tolerance) may have driven drug use results. Conclusions: Working memory training improves performance on some measures of working memory in methadone maintenance patients, and may impact drug use outcomes. Working memory training shows promise in patients with substance use disorders; however, further research is needed to understand the mechanisms through which performance is improved and drug use outcomes are impacted.
    Full-text · Article · Sep 2015 · Drug and alcohol dependence
    • "for fathers), which includes items characteristic of both inattentive and hyperactive symptoms, was used to measure ADHD symptoms. The scale has been found to be a good screening instrument to help identify cases that meet the criteria for ADHD in clinical settings (Chen, Faraone, Biederman, & Tsuang, 1994; Hudziak, Copeland, Stanger, & Wadsworth, 2004). There were five children of whom the CBCL was not completed, and therefore the total sample of the current study consisted of 123 children: "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The objective of this study was to examine the efficacy of child cognitive-behavioral therapy (CCBT) versus family CBT (FCBT) in anxiety-disordered youth with high and low comorbid ADHD symptoms. Youth with anxiety disorders (n = 123, aged 8-18) were classified in four groups according to (a) the type of CBT received (child vs. family) and (b) their comorbid ADHD symptoms, measured with the Child Behavior Checklist (CBCL) Attention Problems syndrome scale level (normal vs. [sub]clinical). Severity of anxiety disorders was assessed with Anxiety Disorders Interview Schedule-Child and Parent (ADIS-C/P) version and anxiety symptoms via a 71-item anxiety symptom questionnaire, the Screen for Child Anxiety and Related Emotional Disorders (SCARED-71), before and after CBT, and at 3 months and 1-year follow-ups. Based on the severity of anxiety disorders, children with high ADHD symptoms profit more from FCBT than CCBT in the long term. For children low on ADHD symptoms, and for anxiety symptoms and attention problems, no differences between CCBT and FCBT occurred. Family involvement seems a valuable addition to CBT for children with comorbid anxiety and ADHD symptoms. © 2015 SAGE Publications.
    No preview · Article · Mar 2015 · Journal of Attention Disorders
    • "Of 73 randomized participants, 56 completed the study (Fig. 1). Exclusion criteria were major untreated medical conditions (e.g., hypertension, diabetes), untreated Axis-I psychiatric disorders except substance abuse and dependence based on DSM-IV-TR criteria (Hudziak et al., 1993, 2004), use of any psychoactive drug other than caffeine and/or nicotine >4 times per week, daily alcohol consumption, or any condition associated with significant cognitive impairment (e.g., history of severe head trauma, HIV, ADHD). Participants without sufficient capacity to complete training and/or assessment (based on Shipley Institute of Living Scale estimated IQ and staff judgment) were also excluded (Zachary et al., 1985). "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Background: Cannabis and opioid use are associated with cognitive impairment, whether preexisting or substance-induced, but there have been few substance-specific assessments of cognitive functioning in adolescent substance users. Working memory impairment may be particularly important, as it has been linked to poorer performance in substance abuse treatment. Methods: Working memory (Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children-IV or Adult Intelligence Scale-IV) and baseline substance use were assessed in 42 youth (mean age = 17.9 years, SD = 1.3, range: 16-20; 65% Caucasian, 30% female) 1-2 weeks after admission to residential treatment with supervised abstinence, 19 for primary cannabis dependence and 23 for primary opioid dependence. Results: There were substantial deficits in working memory in both groups, with significant differences (P < .001) between the opioid (M = 39.1th%ile, SD = 25.6) and cannabis (M = 16.3th%ile, SD = 13.6) groups. The primary opioid group had high rates of cannabis use, with no significant difference in past-month days of cannabis use from the primary cannabis group. The opioid group was older and had completed more years of formal education. Seventy-nine percent of the cannabis group had public health care coverage (mostly Medicaid), compared with 24% of the opioid sample. Conclusions: Working memory impairment was substantial in treatment-seeking youth with primary cannabis and opioid dependence (the latter actually having comparable rates of cannabis use), and significantly more pronounced in the primary cannabis-dependent group. Without an assessment of working memory prior to substance exposure, the differential contributions of substance-induced vs. preexisting impairment are unclear. Lower scores in the cannabis group may reflect lower socioeconomic status (SES), which is typically correlated with cognitive performance. These findings highlight underrecognized cognitive impairment in youth with SUDs, especially inner-city cannabis-dependent youth. Modification of treatments to account for cognitive capacity and/or cognitive remediation interventions may be indicated to improve treatment outcomes.
    No preview · Article · Aug 2014 · Substance Abuse
Show more