Steffie V Gundersen1,2, Robert Goodman3, Lars Clemmensen1, Martin K Rimvall1,2, Anja Munkholm1,2, Charlotte Ulrikka Rask4,5, Anne Mette Skovgaard6,7, Jim Van Os3,8,9, Pia Jeppesen1,2. 1. Child and Adolescent Mental Health Center, Mental Health Services in the Capital Region of Denmark, Glostrup, Denmark. 2. Department of Clinical Medicine, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark. 3. Department of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, Institute of Psychiatry Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College, London, London. 4. Research Clinic for Functional Disorders and Psychosomatics, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark. 5. Child and Adolescent Psychiatric Centre Risskov, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark. 6. Department of Public Health, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark. 7. National Institute of Public Health, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark. 8. Department of Psychiatry and Psychology, Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, The Netherlands. 9. Department of Psychiatry, Brain Center Rudolf Magnus, University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht, the Netherlands.
Abstract
AIM: Valid instruments for the early identification of psychotic experiences (PE) and symptoms in youths are urgently needed for large-scale preventive interventions. A new section of The-Development-and-Well-Being Assessment (DAWBA) measuring child self-reported PE has yet to be validated. The current study aimed to investigate the concurrent validity of DAWBA-based self-reported PE (PE-S) with regard to interview-based measures of PE (PE-I). METHODS: Participants were 1571 (47.8% male) children of age 11 to 12 years from the Copenhagen Child Cohort 2000 (CCC2000) with complete data from both the online PE-section of DAWBA and the following face-to-face interview and assessment of PE. The DAWBA-PE-section asks the child 10 questions covering auditory and visual hallucinations, delusional ideas and subjective thought disturbances ever in life; and attributions to sleep, fever, illness or drug intake. The interview-based assessment of PE was performed by trained professionals using 22 items from The Schedule for Affective Disorders and Schizophrenia for School Aged Children-Present and Lifetime Version (KSADS-PL). The two assessments were completed independently. RESULTS: The prevalence of PE-S was 28.1% (24.3% for PE-S with no frequent attributions), compared with 10.2% for PE-I. The predictive values of PE-S for any PE-I were: sensitivity = 73.8%, specificity = 77.1%, positive predictive value (PPV) = 26.8% and negative predictive value (NPV) = 96.3%. Self-reported visual hallucinations had the best overall predictive values with a sensitivity of 43.1%, specificity of 94.0%, PPV of 44.8% and a NPV of 93.6% for any PE-I. CONCLUSION: The DAWBA-section proved valuable as a screening tool for PE in the youth general population.
AIM: Valid instruments for the early identification of psychotic experiences (PE) and symptoms in youths are urgently needed for large-scale preventive interventions. A new section of The-Development-and-Well-Being Assessment (DAWBA) measuring child self-reported PE has yet to be validated. The current study aimed to investigate the concurrent validity of DAWBA-based self-reported PE (PE-S) with regard to interview-based measures of PE (PE-I). METHODS:Participants were 1571 (47.8% male) children of age 11 to 12 years from the Copenhagen Child Cohort 2000 (CCC2000) with complete data from both the online PE-section of DAWBA and the following face-to-face interview and assessment of PE. The DAWBA-PE-section asks the child 10 questions covering auditory and visual hallucinations, delusional ideas and subjective thought disturbances ever in life; and attributions to sleep, fever, illness or drug intake. The interview-based assessment of PE was performed by trained professionals using 22 items from The Schedule for Affective Disorders and Schizophrenia for School Aged Children-Present and Lifetime Version (KSADS-PL). The two assessments were completed independently. RESULTS: The prevalence of PE-S was 28.1% (24.3% for PE-S with no frequent attributions), compared with 10.2% for PE-I. The predictive values of PE-S for any PE-I were: sensitivity = 73.8%, specificity = 77.1%, positive predictive value (PPV) = 26.8% and negative predictive value (NPV) = 96.3%. Self-reported visual hallucinations had the best overall predictive values with a sensitivity of 43.1%, specificity of 94.0%, PPV of 44.8% and a NPV of 93.6% for any PE-I. CONCLUSION: The DAWBA-section proved valuable as a screening tool for PE in the youth general population.
Authors: Lisa R Steenkamp; Henning Tiemeier; Koen Bolhuis; Manon H J Hillegers; Steven A Kushner; Laura M E Blanken Journal: Acta Psychiatr Scand Date: 2021-02-16 Impact factor: 6.392
Authors: Kim Maijer; Mark Hayward; Charles Fernyhough; Monica E Calkins; Martin Debbané; Renaud Jardri; Ian Kelleher; Andrea Raballo; Aikaterini Rammou; James G Scott; Ann K Shinn; Laura A Steenhuis; Daniel H Wolf; Agna A Bartels-Velthuis Journal: Schizophr Bull Date: 2019-02-01 Impact factor: 9.306
Authors: Lisa R Steenkamp; Koen Bolhuis; Laura M E Blanken; Maartje P C M Luijk; Manon H J Hillegers; Steven A Kushner; Henning Tiemeier Journal: J Child Psychol Psychiatry Date: 2020-06-19 Impact factor: 8.982
Authors: Suzanne E Gerritsen; Athanasios Maras; Larissa S van Bodegom; Mathilde M Overbeek; Frank C Verhulst; Dieter Wolke; Rebecca Appleton; Angelo Bertani; Maria G Cataldo; Patrizia Conti; David Da Fonseca; Nikolina Davidović; Katarina Dodig-Ćurković; Cecilia Ferrari; Federico Fiori; Tomislav Franić; Charlotte Gatherer; Giovanni De Girolamo; Natalie Heaney; Gaëlle Hendrickx; Alfred Kolozsvari; Flavia Micol Levi; Kate Lievesley; Jason Madan; Ottaviano Martinelli; Mathilde Mastroianni; Virginie Maurice; Fiona McNicholas; Lesley O'Hara; Moli Paul; Diane Purper-Ouakil; Veronique de Roeck; Frédérick Russet; Melanie C Saam; Ilyas Sagar-Ouriaghli; Paramala J Santosh; Anne Sartor; Aurélie Schandrin; Ulrike M E Schulze; Giulia Signorini; Swaran P Singh; Jatinder Singh; Cathy Street; Priya Tah; Elena Tanase; Sabine Tremmery; Amanda Tuffrey; Helena Tuomainen; Therese A M J van Amelsvoort; Anna Wilson; Leanne Walker; Gwen C Dieleman Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2021-12-16 Impact factor: 2.692
Authors: S E Gerritsen; L S van Bodegom; G C Dieleman; M M Overbeek; F C Verhulst; D Wolke; D Rizopoulos; R Appleton; T A M J van Amelsvoort; C Bodier Rethore; F Bonnet-Brilhault; I Charvin; D Da Fonseca; N Davidović; K Dodig-Ćurković; A Ferrari; F Fiori; T Franić; C Gatherer; G de Girolamo; N Heaney; G Hendrickx; R Jardri; A Kolozsvari; H Lida-Pulik; K Lievesley; J Madan; M Mastroianni; V Maurice; F McNicholas; R Nacinovich; A Parenti; M Paul; D Purper-Ouakil; L Rivolta; V de Roeck; F Russet; M C Saam; I Sagar-Ouriaghli; P J Santosh; A Sartor; U M E Schulze; P Scocco; G Signorini; S P Singh; J Singh; M Speranza; P Stagi; P Stagni; C Street; P Tah; E Tanase; S Tremmery; A Tuffrey; H Tuomainen; L Walker; A Wilson; A Maras Journal: Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol Date: 2022-02-10 Impact factor: 4.519
Authors: Nicole R Karcher; Rachel L Loewy; Mark Savill; Shelli Avenevoli; Rebekah S Huber; Tony J Simon; Ingrid N Leckliter; Kenneth J Sher; Deanna M Barch Journal: Schizophr Bull Open Date: 2020-06-12