The largely used Child Behavior Check List has been published in 1991. Except for a few modifications, the present CBCL/6-18 is based on the original 113 items. The construct validity of its 8 original syndrome dimensions has been questioned (Hartman et al., J. Child Psychol. Psychiatry 1999;40:1095–116). The 6 DSM-IV oriented scales (Achenbach et al., J. Clin. Child Adol. Psychol. 2003;32:328–40), confirmed for DSM-5, utilize only 55 items, therefore a large number of items remain unused for the clinical characterization, meanwhile the length of the questionnaire could discourage parents for accurate answers. CBCL is covered by copyright, an economic burden especially for epidemiological studies. Following DSM-IV-R criteria, we built the CABI using items more representative for the symptoms of each disorder (still valid for DSM-5). Although CABI includes only 75 items, it explores an almost complete range of psychopathological disorders, including those not explored by CBCL. It is free for use, published in open access. Here we present the completion of the normative data and the results of CABI in various pathological conditions, compared with CBCL. Materials and methods: Normative data, reported in Cianchetti et al. (Clin. Pract. Epidemiol. Mental Health 2013;9:51–61) for children 8–10 y.o., were now extended including a school population 11–18 y.o. Moreover, in a polycentric study, both CABI and CBCL were administered to the parents/caregivers of 8–18 y.o. subjects affected with various psychiatric disorders. Data related to the different pathological conditions as resulted from CABI and CBCL were compared with the final diagnoses. For the comparison, the DSMoriented scales of CBCL were used. Results: Concerning normative data in subjects 11–18 y.o., the more marked difference compared to 8–10 y.o. is the higher presence of externalizing symptoms in males. Concerning pathology, a significant degree of agreement of T values [70 in both CABI and CBCL with the final diagnosis has been found in all the psychopathological domains explored by the interviews, and in CABI also in those not explored by CBCL, like eating disorders. A disagreement between clinical diagnosis and the results of both CABI and CBCL has been found in about 5–20 % of cases in relation to the different disorders, suggesting a wrong evaluation by some parents-caregivers of the condition of the child-adolescent. Conclusions: The CABI results a valid alternative to CBCL, carrying the same diagnostic capabilities. It has the advantage of a minor number of items, which facilitates the collaboration of parents/caregivers especially in case of epidemiological studies. Moreover, it is free.

Child and adolescent behavior inventory (CABI): a new alternative to CBCL

E. Matera;MARGARI, Lucia
2015

Abstract

The largely used Child Behavior Check List has been published in 1991. Except for a few modifications, the present CBCL/6-18 is based on the original 113 items. The construct validity of its 8 original syndrome dimensions has been questioned (Hartman et al., J. Child Psychol. Psychiatry 1999;40:1095–116). The 6 DSM-IV oriented scales (Achenbach et al., J. Clin. Child Adol. Psychol. 2003;32:328–40), confirmed for DSM-5, utilize only 55 items, therefore a large number of items remain unused for the clinical characterization, meanwhile the length of the questionnaire could discourage parents for accurate answers. CBCL is covered by copyright, an economic burden especially for epidemiological studies. Following DSM-IV-R criteria, we built the CABI using items more representative for the symptoms of each disorder (still valid for DSM-5). Although CABI includes only 75 items, it explores an almost complete range of psychopathological disorders, including those not explored by CBCL. It is free for use, published in open access. Here we present the completion of the normative data and the results of CABI in various pathological conditions, compared with CBCL. Materials and methods: Normative data, reported in Cianchetti et al. (Clin. Pract. Epidemiol. Mental Health 2013;9:51–61) for children 8–10 y.o., were now extended including a school population 11–18 y.o. Moreover, in a polycentric study, both CABI and CBCL were administered to the parents/caregivers of 8–18 y.o. subjects affected with various psychiatric disorders. Data related to the different pathological conditions as resulted from CABI and CBCL were compared with the final diagnoses. For the comparison, the DSMoriented scales of CBCL were used. Results: Concerning normative data in subjects 11–18 y.o., the more marked difference compared to 8–10 y.o. is the higher presence of externalizing symptoms in males. Concerning pathology, a significant degree of agreement of T values [70 in both CABI and CBCL with the final diagnosis has been found in all the psychopathological domains explored by the interviews, and in CABI also in those not explored by CBCL, like eating disorders. A disagreement between clinical diagnosis and the results of both CABI and CBCL has been found in about 5–20 % of cases in relation to the different disorders, suggesting a wrong evaluation by some parents-caregivers of the condition of the child-adolescent. Conclusions: The CABI results a valid alternative to CBCL, carrying the same diagnostic capabilities. It has the advantage of a minor number of items, which facilitates the collaboration of parents/caregivers especially in case of epidemiological studies. Moreover, it is free.
File in questo prodotto:
Non ci sono file associati a questo prodotto.

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: http://hdl.handle.net/11586/139861
 Attenzione

Attenzione! I dati visualizzati non sono stati sottoposti a validazione da parte dell'ateneo

Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus ND
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 0
social impact