Peter Kremer1,2, Andrea de Silva1,3, Joyce Cleary4, Giuseppe Santoro1, Karen Weston4, Emily Steele1, Terry Nolan1, Elizabeth Waters1. 1. Melbourne School of Population and Global Health, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia. 2. School of Exercise and Nutrition Sciences, Deakin University, Geelong, Victoria, Australia. 3. Dental Health Services Victoria, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia. 4. Department of Education and Training, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Abstract
AIM: The aim of this study was to report normative data for the parent-reported Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ) from a large population cohort of young children aged 4-6 years from Victoria, Australia, to establish age- and sex-specific cut-off values for future use, and to determine the scale reliability of the SDQ for children aged 4-6 years. METHODS: Parents of children (n = 53 372) entering their first year of school in Victoria in 2010 completed a survey via a 15-page School Entrant Health Questionnaire reporting on the physical and emotional well-being of their child (including the SDQ), use of child health and other support services, and a range of socio-demographic variables. Reliability was assessed and norms generated. Appropriate cut-off values for each SDQ scale and total difficulties scale were generated for each age group separately for each sex. RESULTS: The five scales of the SDQ and total difficulties scale generally had acceptable internal reliability. Mean SDQ scale scores differed for both sex and age, although only a narrow age range is examined in this study. Cut-off values were marginally higher for girls (lower for prosocial) and generally increased with age. CONCLUSIONS: This study has utilised a large Australian population sample of children to generate age- and sex-specific cut-off values that define SDQ scores as 'normal', 'borderline' or 'abnormal' for Australian children aged 4-6 years.
AIM: The aim of this study was to report normative data for the parent-reported Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ) from a large population cohort of young children aged 4-6 years from Victoria, Australia, to establish age- and sex-specific cut-off values for future use, and to determine the scale reliability of the SDQ for children aged 4-6 years. METHODS: Parents of children (n = 53 372) entering their first year of school in Victoria in 2010 completed a survey via a 15-page School Entrant Health Questionnaire reporting on the physical and emotional well-being of their child (including the SDQ), use of child health and other support services, and a range of socio-demographic variables. Reliability was assessed and norms generated. Appropriate cut-off values for each SDQ scale and total difficulties scale were generated for each age group separately for each sex. RESULTS: The five scales of the SDQ and total difficulties scale generally had acceptable internal reliability. Mean SDQ scale scores differed for both sex and age, although only a narrow age range is examined in this study. Cut-off values were marginally higher for girls (lower for prosocial) and generally increased with age. CONCLUSIONS: This study has utilised a large Australian population sample of children to generate age- and sex-specific cut-off values that define SDQ scores as 'normal', 'borderline' or 'abnormal' for Australian children aged 4-6 years.
Authors: Victoria Fruh; Sheryl L Rifas-Shiman; Chitra Amarasiriwardena; Andres Cardenas; David C Bellinger; Lauren A Wise; Roberta F White; Robert O Wright; Emily Oken; Birgit Claus Henn Journal: Neurotoxicology Date: 2019-09-09 Impact factor: 4.294
Authors: Cara L Wong; Teresa Y Ching; Greg Leigh; Linda Cupples; Laura Button; Vivienne Marnane; Jessica Whitfield; Miriam Gunnourie; Louise Martin Journal: Int J Audiol Date: 2016-08-19 Impact factor: 2.117
Authors: Jacqueline F Gould; Rachel M Roberts; Peter J Anderson; Maria Makrides; Thomas R Sullivan; Robert A Gibson; Andrew J McPhee; Lex William Doyle; Gillian Opie; Javeed Travadi; Jeanie L Y Cheong; Peter G Davis; Mary Sharp; Karen Simmer; Kenneth Tan; Scott Morris; Kei Lui; Srinivas Bolisetty; Helen Liley; Jacqueline Stack; Karen P Best; Carmel T Collins Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2021-05-05 Impact factor: 2.692
Authors: Cara L Wong; Teresa Y C Ching; Linda Cupples; Laura Button; Greg Leigh; Vivienne Marnane; Jessica Whitfield; Miriam Gunnourie; Louise Martin Journal: Trends Hear Date: 2017 Jan-Dec Impact factor: 3.293
Authors: Victoria Fruh; Sheryl L Rifas-Shiman; Brent A Coull; Katrina L Devick; Chitra Amarasiriwardena; Andres Cardenas; David C Bellinger; Lauren A Wise; Roberta F White; Robert O Wright; Emily Oken; Birgit Claus Henn Journal: Environ Res Date: 2021-06-21 Impact factor: 8.431