A Comparison of the ASEBA Adult Self Report (ASR) and the Brief Problem Monitor (BPM/18-59)
A Comparison of the ASEBA Adult Self Report (ASR) and the Brief Problem Monitor (BPM/18-59)
复制标题
DOI：
10.1007/s10519-020-10001-3
复制
发表时间：
2020-05-17
影响因子：
2.6
通讯作者：
Bartels, Meike
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
de Vries, Lianne P.;van de Weijer, Margot P.;Bartels, Meike
成人自我报告（ASR）是一种经过充分验证的工具，具有与成人精神病理学相关的多个量表。最近，推出了一个包含18项的版本，即简短问题监控器（BPM），用于测量内化行为（INT）、外化行为（EXT）和注意力问题（ATT）。本研究比较了BPM和ASR，并研究了BPM在特定临床和科学目的中作为ASR的补充或替代的效果。在一个大样本的成年双胞胎（N = 9.835）从荷兰双胞胎登记（NTR），我们比较了内部一致性，临床分类一致性，平均值和方差的ASR和BPM。采用经典双生子设计，我们研究了遗传协方差结构。对于外部验证，主观幸福感和ASR和BPM的不同分量表之间的关联进行了比较。BPM量表的内部一致性（α = 0.75左右）略低于ASR（α类似于0.85）。BPM外部化量表的内部一致性最低（α = 0.63）。ASR和BPM评分具有良好的临床分型一致性（0.61-0.80）和高度相关性（r > 0.88）。BPM外化量表中出现了一个小的反向性别差异（女性>男性）。遗传（0.34-0.54）和环境成分（0.46-0.66）解释了相似程度的ASR和BPM的方差。表型和遗传与幸福的关联是可比的。在总分足够的情况下，BPM的性能与较长的ASR一样好。根据情况和目标，值得考虑将BPM作为ASR的替代方案，以减轻参与者的负担。
The adult self report (ASR) is a well-validated instrument with multiple scales relating to adult psychopathology. Recently, an 18-item version has been introduced, the brief problem monitor (BPM) to measure Internalizing behavior (INT), Externalizing behavior (EXT), and attention problems (ATT). The present study compared the BPM and ASR and investigated how well the BPM can serve as a supplement or an alternative for the ASR for specific clinical and scientific purposes. In a large sample of adult twins (N = 9.835) from the Netherlands Twin Register (NTR), we compared the internal consistency, clinical classification concordance, means, and variances of the ASR and BPM. Using the classical twin design, we investigated the genetic covariance structure. For external validation, the associations between subjective well-being and different subscales of the ASR and BPM were compared. The internal consistency of the BPM scales (around alpha = 0.75) was somewhat lower than the ASR (alpha similar to 0.85). The BPM Externalizing scale showed the lowest internal consistency (alpha = 0.63). ASR and BPM scores showed good clinical classification concordance (0.61-0.80) and high correlations (r > 0.88). A small reversed sex difference in the BPM Externalizing scale appeared (women > men). Genetic (0.34-0.54) and environmental components (0.46-0.66) explained the variance to a similar extent for the ASR and BPM. The phenotypic and genetic associations with well-being were comparable. In situations where sum scores are sufficient, the BPM performs as well as the longer ASR. Depending on the situation and goal, it is worth considering the BPM as an alternative for the ASR to reduce the participant burden.