The DOI matches its Crossref record; 42 of the 42 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The validity, reliability and normative scores of the parent, teacher and self report versions of the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire in China
Open accessAbstract
Background: The Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ) has become one of the most widely used measurement tools in child and adolescent mental health work across the globe. The SDQ was originally developed and validated within the UK and whilst its reliability and validity have been replicated in several countries important cross cultural issues have been raised. We describe normative data, reliability and validity of the Chinese translation of the SDQ (parent, teacher and self report versions) in a large group of children from Shanghai. Methods: The SDQ was administered to the parents and teachers of students from 12 of Shanghai's 19 districts, aged between 3 and 17 years old, and to those young people aged between 11 and 17 years. Retest data was collected from parents and teachers for 45 students six weeks later. Data was analysed to describe normative scores, bandings and cut-offs for normal, borderline and abnormal scores. Reliability was assessed from analyses of internal consistency, inter-rater agreement, and temporal stability. Structural validity, convergent and discriminant validity were assessed. Results: Full parent and teacher data was available for 1965 subjects and self report data for 690 subjects. Normative data for this Chinese urban population with bandings and cut-offs for borderline and abnormal scores are described. Principle components analysis indicates partial agreement with the original five factored subscale structure however this appears to hold more strongly for the Prosocial Behaviour, Hyperactivity – Inattention and Emotional Symptoms subscales than for Conduct Problems and Peer Problems. Internal consistency as measured by Cronbach's α coefficient were generally low ranging between 0.30 and 0.83 with only parent and teacher Hyperactivity – Inattention and teacher Prosocial Behaviour subscales having α > 0.7. Inter-rater correlations were similar to those reported previously (range 0.23 – 0.49) whilst test retest reliability was generally lower than would be expected (range 0.40 – 0.79). Convergent and discriminant validity are supported. Conclusion: We report mixed findings with respect the psychometric properties of the Chinese translation of the SDQ. Reliability is a particular concern particularly for Peer Problems and self ratings by adolescents. There is good support for convergent validity but only partial support for structural validity. It may be possible to resolve some of these issues by carefully examining the wording and meaning of some of the current questions.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
The Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire: A research note
Goodman, R. (1997) · Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry · doi:10.1111/j.1469-7610.1997.tb01545.x · Cited by 14,908
Measuring the Accuracy of Diagnostic Systems
Swets, J. A. (1988) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.3287615 · Cited by 10,058
Psychometric properties of the strengths and difficulties questionnaire
GOODMAN, R. (2001) · Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry · doi:10.1097/00004583-200111000-00015 · Cited by 6,813
Achenbach, T. M., McConaughy, S. H., & Howell, C. T. (1987) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.101.2.213 · Cited by 5,436
Goodman, R., Meltzer, H., & Bailey, V. (1998) · European Child & Adolescent Psychiatry · doi:10.1007/s007870050057 · Cited by 2,238
Psychological Testing: Principles, Applications, and Issues
Kaplan, R. M. (1982) · Cited by 1,799
Goodman, R. (1999) · Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry · doi:10.1017/s0021963099004096 · Cited by 1,756
Mental health of children and adolescents in Great Britain
Meltzer, H., Gatward, R., Goodman, R., & Ford, T. (2003) · International Review of Psychiatry · doi:10.1080/0954026021000046155 · Cited by 1,214
Psychological Testing: Principles and Applications
Murphy, K. R., & Davidshofer, C. O. (1988) · Cited by 1,162
Costello, E. J., Egger, H., & Angold, A. (2005) · Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry · doi:10.1097/01.chi.0000172552.41596.6f · Cited by 1,134
Cited by
Stone, L. L., Otten, R., Engels, R. C. M. E., Vermulst, A. A., & Janssens, J. M. A. M. (2010) · Clinical Child and Family Psychology Review · doi:10.1007/s10567-010-0071-2 · Cited by 1,031
Huang, C.-Y., Yen, H.-C., Tseng, M.-H., Tung, L.-C., Chen, Y.-D., & Chen, K.-L. (2014) · Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders · doi:10.1007/s10803-013-2000-y · Cited by 134
Association Between Screen Time Trajectory and Early Childhood Development in Children in China
Zhao, J., Yu, Z., Sun, X., Wu, S., Zhang, J., Zhang, D., Zhang, Y., & Jiang, F. (2022) · JAMA Pediatrics · doi:10.1001/jamapediatrics.2022.1630 · Cited by 115
Becker, A., Wang, B., Kunze, B., Otto, C., Schlack, R., Hölling, H., Ravens-Sieberer, U., Klasen, F., Rogge, J., Isensee, C., et al. (2018) · Zeitschrift für Kinder- und Jugendpsychiatrie und Psychotherapie · doi:10.1024/1422-4917/a000589 · Cited by 86
Bergström, M., & Baviskar, S. (2021) · Journal of Evidence-Based Social Work · doi:10.1080/26408066.2020.1788477 · Cited by 80
Metadata
- Authors
- Du, Y., Kou, J., & Coghill, D.
- Venue
- Child and Adolescent Psychiatry and Mental Health
- Published
- 2008-04-29
- Volume
- 2
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 8-8
- ISSN
- 1753-2000 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2013462597
- Cited by
- 465
- References
- 42
- FWCI
- 5.74
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The validity, reliability and normative scores of the parent, teacher and self report versions of the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire in China. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1186/1753-2000-2-8
- The paper
- Du, Y., Kou, J., & Coghill, D. (2008). The validity, reliability and normative scores of the parent, teacher and self report versions of the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire in China. Child and Adolescent Psychiatry and Mental Health. https://doi.org/10.1186/1753-2000-2-8
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.