Volume 10 -
MEJDS (2020) 10: 132 |
Back to browse issues page
Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Momenian V, Nazifi M, Talepasand S. Diagnostic Accuracy of Teacher Rating Scales in Discriminating Children with and without Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder. MEJDS 2020; 10 :132-132
URL: http://jdisabilstud.org/article-1-1307-en.html
URL: http://jdisabilstud.org/article-1-1307-en.html
1- Department of Psychology, Faculty of Psychology and Educational Sciences, Semnan University
2- Department of Psychology, University of Bojnord
3- Department of Educational Psychology, Faculty of Psychology and Educational Sciences, Semnan University
2- Department of Psychology, University of Bojnord
3- Department of Educational Psychology, Faculty of Psychology and Educational Sciences, Semnan University
Abstract: (2107 Views)
Background & Objectives: The accurate and timely diagnosis of Attention–Deficit Hyperactivity/Disorder (ADHD) has been evidenced to be especially complex and challenging. This study aimed to investigate the diagnostic power of behavioral rating scales responded by teachers in diagnosing ADHD as well as their other methodological properties. Pursuing this goal is especially important in Iran due to the lack of proper diagnostic tools for ADHD assessment.
Methods: This was a descriptive and methodological study. The statistical population included all male students in Mashhad City, Iran, in the 2014–2015 academic year. Besides, our study sample consisted of 40 male students selected through the direct observation of children in their classroom, interviews with their teachers and their parents, and examining children’s educational records. Parents and teachers signed informed consent forms and they were informed about the confidentiality of the obtained data. Of the study samples, 20 were healthy and 20 had received ADHD diagnosis by a physician before participating in our study. We administered a short three–subscale form of the Wechsler’s Intelligence Scale for Children–Revised (WISC–R) on all study participants to ensure they have no Intellectual Disability (ID) and that the two groups were matched by Intelligence Quotient (IQ). Then, we trained blind interviewers to administer semi–structured interviews on the children’s teachers to verify their initial ADHD diagnoses. Moreover, the teachers were requested to rate the children’s classroom behavior using Conner’s Teacher Rating Scale (CTRS) (1969) and Swanson, Nolan and Pelham’s Fourth Revision Scale (SNAP–IV) (1980) two times with one–month interval. We used Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) analysis to calculate sensitivity and specificity as well as False Positive Rate (FPR) and False Negatives Rate (FNR) for these scales. Additionally, we used Cronbach’s alpha coefficient and Pearson correlation coefficient methods to investigate the internal consistency and test–retest reliability of these inventories.
Results: Multivariate Analysis of Variance (MANOVA) followed by separate Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) as post–hoc test indicated that all the subscales of CTRS and SNAP–IV could significantly distinguish ADHD and non–ADHD children. Cronbach’s alpha coefficient for the total scale (all 18 items), predominantly inattentive subscale (first 9 items), and predominantly hyperactive/impulsive subscale (second 9 items) of SNAP–IV were measured as 0.99, 0.98, and 0.89, respectively; these data indicated excellent internal consistencies of the subscales. Test–retest reliabilities for the total scale (all 18 items), predominantly inattentive subscale (first 9 items), and predominantly hyperactive/impulsive subscale (second 9 items) of SNAP–IV were computed as 0.95, 0.96, and, 0.93 respectively, indicating excellent test–retest reliabilities. For CTRS rating scale, Cronbach’s alpha coefficients were calculated as 0.96, 0.87, and 0.52 for classroom behavior, group participation, and attitude toward authority subscales, respectively. Test–retest reliabilities for classroom behavior, group participation, and attitude toward authority subscales were 0.92, 0.85, and 0.69, respectively. The ROC analyses data also revealed an excellent to acceptable sensitivity and specificity for all the subscales of CTRS and SNAP–IV. All achieved sensitivities ranged between 0.80 and 0.95, all specificities between 0.75 and 0.95, and all Areas under Curve (AUC) between 0.85 and 0.99; these findings indicated an excellent diagnostic power with low FPR and FNR rates.
Conclusion: The present research results suggested excellent to acceptable diagnostic accuracy and proper methodological properties for the Persian versions of CTRS and SNAP–IV. These scales could successfully reduce FPR and FNR rates; therefore, they could be considered as beneficial and complementary diagnostic tools in the multi–method assessment of ADHD. Although CTRS and SNAP–IV presented excellent diagnostic accuracy in this study, using them in isolation is recommended.
Methods: This was a descriptive and methodological study. The statistical population included all male students in Mashhad City, Iran, in the 2014–2015 academic year. Besides, our study sample consisted of 40 male students selected through the direct observation of children in their classroom, interviews with their teachers and their parents, and examining children’s educational records. Parents and teachers signed informed consent forms and they were informed about the confidentiality of the obtained data. Of the study samples, 20 were healthy and 20 had received ADHD diagnosis by a physician before participating in our study. We administered a short three–subscale form of the Wechsler’s Intelligence Scale for Children–Revised (WISC–R) on all study participants to ensure they have no Intellectual Disability (ID) and that the two groups were matched by Intelligence Quotient (IQ). Then, we trained blind interviewers to administer semi–structured interviews on the children’s teachers to verify their initial ADHD diagnoses. Moreover, the teachers were requested to rate the children’s classroom behavior using Conner’s Teacher Rating Scale (CTRS) (1969) and Swanson, Nolan and Pelham’s Fourth Revision Scale (SNAP–IV) (1980) two times with one–month interval. We used Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) analysis to calculate sensitivity and specificity as well as False Positive Rate (FPR) and False Negatives Rate (FNR) for these scales. Additionally, we used Cronbach’s alpha coefficient and Pearson correlation coefficient methods to investigate the internal consistency and test–retest reliability of these inventories.
Results: Multivariate Analysis of Variance (MANOVA) followed by separate Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) as post–hoc test indicated that all the subscales of CTRS and SNAP–IV could significantly distinguish ADHD and non–ADHD children. Cronbach’s alpha coefficient for the total scale (all 18 items), predominantly inattentive subscale (first 9 items), and predominantly hyperactive/impulsive subscale (second 9 items) of SNAP–IV were measured as 0.99, 0.98, and 0.89, respectively; these data indicated excellent internal consistencies of the subscales. Test–retest reliabilities for the total scale (all 18 items), predominantly inattentive subscale (first 9 items), and predominantly hyperactive/impulsive subscale (second 9 items) of SNAP–IV were computed as 0.95, 0.96, and, 0.93 respectively, indicating excellent test–retest reliabilities. For CTRS rating scale, Cronbach’s alpha coefficients were calculated as 0.96, 0.87, and 0.52 for classroom behavior, group participation, and attitude toward authority subscales, respectively. Test–retest reliabilities for classroom behavior, group participation, and attitude toward authority subscales were 0.92, 0.85, and 0.69, respectively. The ROC analyses data also revealed an excellent to acceptable sensitivity and specificity for all the subscales of CTRS and SNAP–IV. All achieved sensitivities ranged between 0.80 and 0.95, all specificities between 0.75 and 0.95, and all Areas under Curve (AUC) between 0.85 and 0.99; these findings indicated an excellent diagnostic power with low FPR and FNR rates.
Conclusion: The present research results suggested excellent to acceptable diagnostic accuracy and proper methodological properties for the Persian versions of CTRS and SNAP–IV. These scales could successfully reduce FPR and FNR rates; therefore, they could be considered as beneficial and complementary diagnostic tools in the multi–method assessment of ADHD. Although CTRS and SNAP–IV presented excellent diagnostic accuracy in this study, using them in isolation is recommended.
Type of Study: Original Research Article |
Subject:
Psychology
References
1. American Psychiatric Association. Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders: DSM-5. 5th ed. Washington, D.C: American Psychiatric Association; 2013.
2. Polanczyk G, de Lima MS, Horta BL, Biederman J, Rohde LA. The worldwide prevalence of ADHD: a systematic review and metaregression analysis. Am J Psychiatry. 2007;164(6):942–8. [DOI]
3. Salehi B, Moradi S, Ebrahimi S, Rafeei M. Comparison of ADHD (Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder) prevalence between female and male students of primary schools in Arak City in academic year of 2009-2010. Sci J Kurdistan Uni Med Sci. 2011;16(2):45–54. [Persian] [Article]
4. Piñeiro-Dieguez B, Balanzá-Martínez V, García-García P, Soler-López B, the CAT Study Group. Psychiatric comorbidity at the time of diagnosis in adults With ADHD: The CAT Study. J Atten Disord. 2016;20(12):1066–75. [DOI]
5. Taylor E. Uses and misuses of treatments for ADHD. The second Birgit Olsson lecture. Nord J Psychiatry. 2014;68(4):236–42. [DOI]
6. Ginsberg Y, Quintero J, Anand E, Casillas M, Upadhyaya HP. Underdiagnosis of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder in adult patients: a review of the literature. Prim Care Companion CNS Disord. 2014;16(3): PCC.13r01600. [DOI]
7. Upadhyay N, Chen H, Mgbere O, Bhatara VS, Aparasu RR. The impact of pharmacotherapy on substance use in adolescents with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder: variations across subtypes. Subst Use Misuse. 2017;52(10):1266–74. [DOI]
8. Rosenberg MD, Finn ES, Scheinost D, Papademetris X, Shen X, Constable RT, et al. A neuromarker of sustained attention from whole-brain functional connectivity. Nat Neurosci. 2016;19(1):165–71. [DOI]
9. Conners CK. Conners Early Childhood (Conners EC). Pearson; 2009.
10. Swanson JM, Kraemer HC, Hinshaw SP, Arnold LE, Conners CK, Abikoff HB, et al. Clinical relevance of the primary findings of the MTA: success rates based on severity of ADHD and ODD symptoms at the end of treatment. J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry. 2001;40(2):168–79. [DOI]
11. Chang L-Y, Wang M-Y, Tsai P-S. Diagnostic accuracy of rating scales for attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder: A meta-analysis. Pediatrics. 2016;137(3):e20152749. [DOI]
12. Conners CK, Sitarenios G, Parker JD, Epstein JN. The revised Conners’ Parent Rating Scale (CPRS-R): factor structure, reliability, and criterion validity. J Abnorm Child Psychol. 1998;26(4):257–68. [DOI]
13. Costa DS, de Paula JJ, Malloy-Diniz LF, Romano-Silva MA, Miranda DM. Parent SNAP-IV rating of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder: accuracy in a clinical sample of ADHD, validity, and reliability in a Brazilian sample. J Pediatr. 2019;95(6):736–43. [DOI]
14. Bussing R, Fernandez M, Harwood M, Wei Hou null, Garvan CW, Eyberg SM, et al. Parent and teacher SNAP-IV ratings of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder symptoms: psychometric properties and normative ratings from a school district sample. Assessment. 2008;15(3):317–28. [DOI]
15. Wechsler D. Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children. San Antonio, TX, US: Psychological Corporation; 1949.
16. Shahim S. Barrasi formhaye kootah meghyas Wechsler koodakan baray estefade dar Iran [Examination of Short Forms of WISC for use in Iran]. Educational and Humanities, Shiraz University. 1994;9(2):67–79. [Persian]
17. Conners CK. Manual for Conners’ Rating Scales. Toronto: Multi-Health Systems. Inc;1990.
18. Shahim S, Yousefi F, Shahaeian A. Standardization and psycbometric characteristics of the conners’ teacher rating scale. Journal of Education and Psychology. 2007;14(12):1–26. [Persian]
19. Mohammadi E, Abedi A, Aghaei A, Mohammadi M. A study of psychometric characteristies of SNAP-IV rating scale (parents’ form) in elementary school students in Isfahan. New Educational Approaches. 2013;8(1):149–68. [Persian] [Article]
20. Safari S, Baratloo A, Elfil M, Negida A. Evidence based emergency medicine; Part 5 receiver operating curve and area under the curve. Emerg (Tehran). 2016;4(2):111–3.
Send email to the article author
| Rights and permissions | |
 |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |
