Surveillance of Internalizing Behaviors: A Reliability and Validity Generalization Study of Universal Screening Evidence
Surveillance of Internalizing Behaviors: A Reliability and Validity Generalization Study of Universal Screening Evidence
复制标题
DOI：
10.1007/s12310-018-9290-3
复制
发表时间：
2019-06-01
影响因子：
2.6
通讯作者：
Hodgson, Caroline
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Allen, Amanda N.;Kilgus, Stephen P.;Hodgson, Caroline
由于发病早和患病率上升，已确定有必要及早识别表现出内在性障碍症状(如焦虑和抑郁)的青年。因此，呼吁使用通用的筛查工具来识别内在化行为风险。目前的研究已经谈到了个体筛查者的充分性，但研究人员还没有定量地综合更广泛的内化筛查文献。本研究的目的是系统地回顾文献，并对现有的心理测量学证据进行信度和效度概括的Meta分析。这项荟萃分析确定了40项研究，其中18项不同的内化行为筛查者被审查。令人感兴趣的是(A)宽带筛查器，它包括内在化物品和其他领域特定的物品(例如，外部化问题)，以及(B)窄带筛查器，它只包括内在化物品。在检查过的研究中，宽带筛查者的平均系数α可靠性估计等于0.84，窄带筛查者的平均系数α可靠性估计等于0.78。对于宽带筛查者，当预测其他内化措施时，平均效度相关系数等于0.66，当预测其他标准(例如，现有的学术和行为数据)时，平均效度相关系数等于0.51。对于窄带筛查者，当预测其他内化措施时，平均有效性系数等于.45，当预测其他标准时，平均有效性系数等于.26。有趣的是，主持人分析表明，信度和效度都不受任何研究或测量特征的影响。综上所述，结果支持宽带和窄带内化筛查者的心理防御能力。讨论了研究的局限性和对研究的影响，包括对其他诊断准确性研究的建议。
Due to early onset and rising prevalence rates, there is an established need for early identification of youth demonstrating symptoms of internalizing disorders (e.g., anxiety and depression). Accordingly, calls have been made for the use of universal screening tools to identify internalizing behavior risk. Current research has spoken to the adequacy of individual screeners, but researchers have yet to quantitatively synthesize the broader internalizing screening literature. The purpose of the current study was to systematically review the literature and conduct a reliability and validity generalization meta-analysis of available psychometric evidence. This meta-analysis identified 40 studies in which 18 distinct internalizing behavior screeners were examined. Of interest were both (a) broadband screeners, which included internalizing items along with items specific to other areas (e.g., externalizing problems), and (b) narrowband screeners, which included internalizing items alone. Across examined studies, mean coefficient alpha reliability estimates were equal to .84 for broadband screeners and .78 for narrowband screeners. For broadband screeners, mean validity correlation coefficients were equal to .66 when predicting other internalizing measures and .51 when predicting other criteria (e.g., extant academic and behavioral data). For narrowband screeners, mean validity coefficients were equal to .45 when predicting other internalizing measures and .26 when predicting other criteria. Interestingly, moderator analyses indicated neither reliability nor validity was moderated by any study or measurement characteristics. Taken together, results supported the psychometric defensibility of both broadband and narrowband internalizing screeners. Limitations of the study and implications for research are discussed, including recommendations for additional diagnostic accuracy research.