CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 73Mental Health Research TopicsChild and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional DevelopmentPersonality Disorders and Psychopathology

“P” and “DP:” Examining symptom-level bifactor models of psychopathology and dysregulation in clinically referred children and adolescents

Open access
Haltigan, John D., Aitken, Madison, Skilling, Tracey, Henderson, Joanna, Hawke, Lisa, Battaglia, Marco, Strauss, John, Szatmari, Peter +1 more·2018·Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry
DOI 10.1016/j.jaac.2018.03.010
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Objective This study examined cross-informant evidence for a general factor of psychopathology ("P") and a narrower, clinically oriented dysregulation general factor based on the Dysregulation Profile ("DP") in a large clinical sample of children and adolescents. We also compared the magnitude of P and DP general factor associations with self-harm and suicidal ideation as an indicator of criterion validity.Method Itemwise data from the Child Behavior Checklist (N = 2,934; 4-18 years of age) were analyzed using confirmatory bifactor modeling and replicated in a supplementary analysis using Youth Self Report data (N = 2,395).Results General P and DP bifactor models fit the data better than single-factor and correlated factor models. Cross-informant criterion analyses on a subset of youth (n = 1,552) suggested that whether modeled as latent P or DP, associations with a brief composite index of self-harm and suicidal ideation are essentially of the same magnitude.Conclusion Our findings provide novel, large-sample support for the existence of general factors of psychopathology and dysregulation in clinically referred children and adolescents using a standardized rating system of psychopathology symptoms. Moreover, our results provide preliminary evidence that general psychopathology and dysregulation factors are clinically meaningful constructs. In addition, our findings raise the possibility that the DP general factor may serve as an efficient proxy for the general psychopathology factor in future clinical applications. Further efforts are necessary to understand the core empirical meaning of the P factor and to determine how it can be applied to clinical assessment and intervention.

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 · 10.1016/j.jaac.2018.03.010

Cites

59 of 59 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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?

  • Other empirical studies employing the bifactor model have failed to find evidence for p or have found that a more specific factor fit just as well.

    “Other empirical studies employing the bifactor model have failed to find evidence for p (17) or have found that a more specific factor fit just as well (58).”

    From Methods and challenges for assessing heterogeneity (2020) · cites this paper as [58]

Self-check

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

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

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Laceulle OM, Vollebergh WAM, Ormel J. The structure of psychopathology in adolescence. Clin Psychol Sci. 2015;3:850-860.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Haltigan, J. D., Aitken, M., Skilling, T., Henderson, J., Hawke, L., Battaglia, M., Strauss, J., Szatmari, P., & Andrade, B. F.
Affiliations
Centre for Addiction and Mental Health (CA)
Corresponding author
Haltigan, John D.
ORCID
Venue
Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2018-06
Volume
57
Issue
6
Pages
384-396
ISSN
0890-8567 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.jaac.2018.03.010
OpenAlex
W2796627344
Cited by
73
References
59
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 13 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 18 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 2
FWCI
11.46
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • University of Ottawa
  • Ontario Genomics
  • Centre for Addiction and Mental Health Foundation
  • Medical Psychiatry Alliance
  • Ontario Genomics Institute
  • University of Toronto
  • Hospital for Sick Children
  • Réseau québécois de recherche sur la douleur
  • Cundill Centre for Child and Youth Depression
  • Health Canada
  • Canadian Institutes of Health Research
  • Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
  • Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Mental Health Research Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Child and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional Development
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Personality Disorders and Psychopathology
Keywords
general psychopathology factor, bifactor model, children and adolescents, self-harm, suicidal ideation, Child Behavior Checklist, Youth Self-Report
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Child, Child Behavior Disorders, Female, Humans, Male, Psychiatric Status Rating Scales, Psychopathology, Models, Statistical, Self-Injurious Behavior, Checklist, Self Report, Suicidal Ideation

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