A Psychometric Review of Measures of ADHD in Early Childhood.

Autor/inn/en	Sciutto, Mark J.; Terjesen, Mark D.
Titel	A Psychometric Review of Measures of ADHD in Early Childhood.
Quelle	(2000), (9 Seiten) PDF als Volltext kostenfreie Datei Verfügbarkeit
Beigaben	Tabellen
Sprache	englisch
Dokumenttyp	gedruckt; online; Monographie
Schlagwörter	Tagungsbericht; Attention Deficit Disorders; Diagnostic Tests; Hyperactivity; Norms; Preschool Children; Preschool Education; Psychometrics; Rating Scales; Reliability; Validity + Suchen Sie Ihr Suchwort? Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder; ADHS; Aufmerksamkeits-Defizit-Hyperaktivitäts-Störung; Aufmerksamkeitsstörung; Diagnostic test; Diagnostischer Test; Hyperaktivität; Normwert; Pre-school age; Preschool age; Child; Children; Pre-school education; Preschool education; Vorschulalter; Kind; Kinder; Vorschulkind; Vorschulkinder; Vorschulerziehung; Vorschule; Psychometry; Psychometrie; Rating-Skala; Reliabilität; Gültigkeit
Abstract	This study examined the psychometric and technical characteristics of various measures of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) that are commonly used with preschool-aged children. Information on reliability, validity, norms, and scale-specific features was gathered from the test manuals of four commonly used behavior rating scales: (1) Early Childhood Attention Deficit Disorders Evaluation Scale (S. McCarney, 1995); (2) Behavior Assessment System for Children (C. Reynolds and R. Kamphaus, 1994); (3) Connors' Rating Scales-Revised (C. Connors, 1990); and (4) ADHD Rating Scale-IV (G. DuPaul, T. Power, A. Anastopoulous, and R. Reid, 1998). Although most of the test manuals reviewed provided sufficient evidence of reliability and validity for ages 5 and up, many did not provide sufficient detail about psychometric data from preschoolers. In many cases, psychometric information relevant to assessment with preschoolers was presented but was grouped with data from other age groups (e.g., ages 4-11). Furthermore, because the scales reviewed in this article differed in terms of various special features, such as validity scales and clinical norms, clinicians should carefully consider the match between the purposes of the assessment and the instrument used. (Contains 4 tables and 11 references.) (Author/SLD)
Erfasst von	ERIC (Education Resources Information Center), Washington, DC
Update	2004/1/01