CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 1,031Child and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional DevelopmentPsychometric Methodologies and TestingAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 125 of the 129 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Psychometric Properties of the Parent and Teacher Versions of the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire for 4- to 12-Year-Olds: A Review

Open access
Stone, Lisanne L., Otten, Roy, Engels, Rutger C. M. E., Vermulst, Ad A., Janssens, Jan M. A. M.·2010·Clinical Child and Family Psychology Review
DOI 10.1007/s10567-010-0071-2PMC PMC2919684
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Since its development, the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ) has been widely used in both research and practice. The SDQ screens for positive and negative psychological attributes. This review aims to provide an overview of the psychometric properties of the SDQ for 4- to 12-year-olds. Results from 48 studies (N = 131,223) on reliability and validity of the parent and teacher SDQ are summarized quantitatively and descriptively. Internal consistency, test-retest reliability, and inter-rater agreement are satisfactory for the parent and teacher versions. At subscale level, the reliability of the teacher version seemed stronger compared to that of the parent version. Concerning validity, 15 out of 18 studies confirmed the five-factor structure. Correlations with other measures of psychopathology as well as the screening ability of the SDQ are sufficient. This review shows that the psychometric properties of the SDQ are strong, particularly for the teacher version. For practice, this implies that the use of the SDQ as a screening instrument should be continued. Longitudinal research studies should investigate predictive validity. For both practice and research, we emphasize the use of a multi-informant approach.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s10567-010-0071-2

Cites

125 of 125 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

4 of the 129 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 6

  1. Du, Y., Su, L., & Li, X. (1995). Usage of Conners Parent Symptom Questionnaire in boys with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder. Chinese Journal of Clinical Psychology, 1, 44–45.
  2. Holland, D., & Dadds, M. (1995). The diagnostic schedule for children, adolescents and parents. Brisbane: Griffith University Press.
  3. Scholte, E. M., & Van der Ploeg, J. D. (1998). ADHD Vragenlijst (ADHD Questionnaire). Lisse: Swets & Zeitlinger.
  4. Streiner, D. L., & Norman, G. R. (1989). Health measurements scales. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
  5. Swanson, J. M. (1992). School-based assessments and interventions for ADD children. Irvine, CA: KC.
  6. World Health Organization. (1992). International classification of diseases 10th edition: Classification of mental and behavioural disorders. Geneva: WHO.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 1,031

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Stone, L. L., Otten, R., Engels, R. C. M. E., Vermulst, A. A., & Janssens, J. M. A. M.
Affiliations
Radboud University Nijmegen (NL)
Corresponding author
Stone, Lisanne L.
ORCID
Venue
Clinical Child and Family Psychology Review
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Published
2010-06-30
Volume
13
Issue
3
Pages
254-274
ISSN
  • 1096-4037 (ISSN-L)
  • 1573-2827
DOI
10.1007/s10567-010-0071-2
PMC
PMC2919684
OpenAlex
W2098063426
Cited by
1,031
References
129
Citations by year
2026: 52 · 2025: 67 · 2024: 72 · 2023: 63 · 2022: 74 · 2021: 100 · 2020: 99 · 2019: 76 · 2018: 72 · 2017: 75 · 2016: 74 · 2015: 60 · 2014: 70 · 2013: 46 · 2012: 22
FWCI
3.52
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by-nc
Locations
  • Clinical Child and Family Psychology Review (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Radboud Repository (Radboud University) (submittedVersion)
Funders
ZonMw
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Child and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional Development
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Psychometric Methodologies and Testing
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
Keywords
Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire, psychometric properties, reliability statistics, validity, parent report, teacher reports, child mental health screening, five-factor structure, multi-informant assessment, children aged 4 to 12
MeSH terms
Mental Disorders, Child, Child, Preschool, Female, Humans, Male, Mass Screening, Personality Assessment, Psychometrics, Surveys and Questionnaires, Observer Variation

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review