Cited by 45Child and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional DevelopmentAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesMental Health Treatment and Access

The ability of YSR DSM-oriented depression scales to predict DSM-IV depression in young adults: A longitudinal study

Dingle, Kaeleen, Alati, Rosa, Williams, Gail M., Najman, Jake M., Bor, William, Clavarino, Alexandra·2010·Journal of Affective Disorders

Abstract

Background The Achenbach child behaviour checklist (CBCL/YSR) is a widely used screening tool for affective problems. Several studies report good association between the checklists and psychiatric diagnoses; although with varying degrees of agreement. Most are cross-sectional studies involving adolescents referred to mental health services. This paper aims to evaluate the performance of the youth self report (YSR) empirical and DSM-oriented internalising scales in predicting later depressive disorders in young adults.Methods Sample was 2431 young adults from an Australian birth cohort study. The strength of association between the empirical and DSM-oriented scales assessed at 14 and 21 years and structured-interview derived depression in young adulthood (18 to 22 years) were tested using odds ratios, ROC analyses and related diagnostic efficiency tests (sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values).Results Adolescents with internalising symptoms were twice (OR 2.3, 95%CI 1.7 to 3.1) as likely to be diagnosed with DSM-IV depression by age 21. Use of DSM-oriented depressive scales did not improve the concordance between the internalising behaviour and DSM-IV diagnosed depression at age 14 (ORs ranged from 1.9 to 2.5).Limitations Some loss to follow-up over the 7-year gap between the two waves of follow-up.Conclusion DSM-oriented scales perform no better than the standard internalising or anxious/depressed scales in identifying young adults with later DSM-IV depressive disorder.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jad.2009.05.013

Cites

35 of 35 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Dingle, K., Alati, R., Williams, G. M., Najman, J. M., Bor, W., & Clavarino, A.
Affiliations
The University of Queensland (AU)
Corresponding author
Dingle, Kaeleen
Venue
Journal of Affective Disorders
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2010-02
Volume
121
Issue
1-2
Pages
45-51
ISSN
0165-0327 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2105012411
Cited by
45
References
35
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 16 · 2020: 1 · 2018: 3 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 2 · 2012: 1
FWCI
1.77
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Affective Disorders (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
University of Queensland
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Child and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional Development
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Mental Health Treatment and Access
Keywords
Youth Self-Report, internalizing problems, adolescent screening, young adults, diagnostic agreement, birth cohort
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Cross-Sectional Studies, Major Depressive Disorder, Female, Humans, Internal-External Control, Longitudinal Studies, Male, Personality Inventory, Prospective Studies, Psychometrics, Queensland, Reproducibility of Results, Cohort Studies, Dysthymic Disorder, Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Young Adult

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