Internal consistency and structural validity of the parent-report preschool (2-4 years) Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire in 1-year-old children

Abstract Background Prevention and early intervention are key to addressing poor child mental health. Systematic reviews have highlighted a lack of brief, valid and reliable outcome measures that can be implemented in both research and practice to assess social, emotional and behavioural outcomes in...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Sarah L. Blower, Kate E. Mooney, Nicole Gridley, Fionnuala Larkin, Tracey J. Bywater, G. J. Melendez-Torres
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: SpringerOpen 2025-06-01
Series:Journal of Patient-Reported Outcomes
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.1186/s41687-025-00905-1
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
_version_ 1849420624243458048
author Sarah L. Blower
Kate E. Mooney
Nicole Gridley
Fionnuala Larkin
Tracey J. Bywater
G. J. Melendez-Torres
author_facet Sarah L. Blower
Kate E. Mooney
Nicole Gridley
Fionnuala Larkin
Tracey J. Bywater
G. J. Melendez-Torres
author_sort Sarah L. Blower
collection DOAJ
description Abstract Background Prevention and early intervention are key to addressing poor child mental health. Systematic reviews have highlighted a lack of brief, valid and reliable outcome measures that can be implemented in both research and practice to assess social, emotional and behavioural outcomes in the early years. The Preschool Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (2–4 years) is a promising candidate to fill this gap, but the measurement properties of this tool are not yet known in very young children. Methods A secondary data analysis of two clinical trial datasets was conducted to examine the internal consistency reliability and structural validity of the parent-report English preschool version of the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire in a sample of 505 infants with mean average age of 18 months (SD .81). The measure was designed for children aged 2–4 years and was not modified prior to use with 1-year-olds in this study. Structural validity was examined in two Confirmatory Factor Analyses (CFA) testing two-factor and five-factor models (representing factor structures proposed by the developers of SDQ), and McDonald’s coefficient Omega was estimated for each subscale with values > .70 considered acceptable. Results The model fit values for the two-factor model demonstrated a poor fit to the data (X 2  = 626.067(151) = p < .001, CFI = 0.612, RMSEA = 0.079 [90% CI .073 to .085], SRMR = .077) and the omega value was below acceptable at ω = .57 for the internalising subscale and ω = .76 for the externalising subscale. The five-factor model also demonstrated a poor fit to the data (X 2  = 836.813(242) = p < .001, CFI = 0.676, RMSEA = 0.070 [90% CI .065 to .075], SRMR = .081). Omega values were below acceptable for three out of five subscales. Discussion We concluded that the measure has poor internal consistency and lacks structural validity in this very young age group. Further research to adapt the SDQ in order to improve content and face validity is recommended prior to any further psychometric analyses with this very young age group. The paucity of robust and practical outcome measures of early social, emotional and behavioural poses significant challenges to the early identification of need and evaluation of interventions.
format Article
id doaj-art-fa909f13192e408caa6b8514661d89ae
institution Kabale University
issn 2509-8020
language English
publishDate 2025-06-01
publisher SpringerOpen
record_format Article
series Journal of Patient-Reported Outcomes
spelling doaj-art-fa909f13192e408caa6b8514661d89ae2025-08-20T03:31:42ZengSpringerOpenJournal of Patient-Reported Outcomes2509-80202025-06-01911810.1186/s41687-025-00905-1Internal consistency and structural validity of the parent-report preschool (2-4 years) Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire in 1-year-old childrenSarah L. Blower0Kate E. Mooney1Nicole Gridley2Fionnuala Larkin3Tracey J. Bywater4G. J. Melendez-Torres5Department of Health Sciences, Seebohm Rowntree Building, University of YorkDepartment of Health Sciences, Seebohm Rowntree Building, University of YorkCarnegie School of Education, Carnegie Hall, 222, Headingley Campus, Leeds Beckett UniversitySchool of Applied Psychology, University College Cork, Cork Enterprise Centre, North MallDepartment of Health Sciences, Seebohm Rowntree Building, University of YorkUniversity of Exeter Medical School, South Cloisters, University of Exeter, St Luke’s CampusAbstract Background Prevention and early intervention are key to addressing poor child mental health. Systematic reviews have highlighted a lack of brief, valid and reliable outcome measures that can be implemented in both research and practice to assess social, emotional and behavioural outcomes in the early years. The Preschool Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (2–4 years) is a promising candidate to fill this gap, but the measurement properties of this tool are not yet known in very young children. Methods A secondary data analysis of two clinical trial datasets was conducted to examine the internal consistency reliability and structural validity of the parent-report English preschool version of the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire in a sample of 505 infants with mean average age of 18 months (SD .81). The measure was designed for children aged 2–4 years and was not modified prior to use with 1-year-olds in this study. Structural validity was examined in two Confirmatory Factor Analyses (CFA) testing two-factor and five-factor models (representing factor structures proposed by the developers of SDQ), and McDonald’s coefficient Omega was estimated for each subscale with values > .70 considered acceptable. Results The model fit values for the two-factor model demonstrated a poor fit to the data (X 2  = 626.067(151) = p < .001, CFI = 0.612, RMSEA = 0.079 [90% CI .073 to .085], SRMR = .077) and the omega value was below acceptable at ω = .57 for the internalising subscale and ω = .76 for the externalising subscale. The five-factor model also demonstrated a poor fit to the data (X 2  = 836.813(242) = p < .001, CFI = 0.676, RMSEA = 0.070 [90% CI .065 to .075], SRMR = .081). Omega values were below acceptable for three out of five subscales. Discussion We concluded that the measure has poor internal consistency and lacks structural validity in this very young age group. Further research to adapt the SDQ in order to improve content and face validity is recommended prior to any further psychometric analyses with this very young age group. The paucity of robust and practical outcome measures of early social, emotional and behavioural poses significant challenges to the early identification of need and evaluation of interventions.https://doi.org/10.1186/s41687-025-00905-1
spellingShingle Sarah L. Blower
Kate E. Mooney
Nicole Gridley
Fionnuala Larkin
Tracey J. Bywater
G. J. Melendez-Torres
Internal consistency and structural validity of the parent-report preschool (2-4 years) Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire in 1-year-old children
Journal of Patient-Reported Outcomes
title Internal consistency and structural validity of the parent-report preschool (2-4 years) Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire in 1-year-old children
title_full Internal consistency and structural validity of the parent-report preschool (2-4 years) Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire in 1-year-old children
title_fullStr Internal consistency and structural validity of the parent-report preschool (2-4 years) Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire in 1-year-old children
title_full_unstemmed Internal consistency and structural validity of the parent-report preschool (2-4 years) Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire in 1-year-old children
title_short Internal consistency and structural validity of the parent-report preschool (2-4 years) Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire in 1-year-old children
title_sort internal consistency and structural validity of the parent report preschool 2 4 years strengths and difficulties questionnaire in 1 year old children
url https://doi.org/10.1186/s41687-025-00905-1
work_keys_str_mv AT sarahlblower internalconsistencyandstructuralvalidityoftheparentreportpreschool24yearsstrengthsanddifficultiesquestionnairein1yearoldchildren
AT kateemooney internalconsistencyandstructuralvalidityoftheparentreportpreschool24yearsstrengthsanddifficultiesquestionnairein1yearoldchildren
AT nicolegridley internalconsistencyandstructuralvalidityoftheparentreportpreschool24yearsstrengthsanddifficultiesquestionnairein1yearoldchildren
AT fionnualalarkin internalconsistencyandstructuralvalidityoftheparentreportpreschool24yearsstrengthsanddifficultiesquestionnairein1yearoldchildren
AT traceyjbywater internalconsistencyandstructuralvalidityoftheparentreportpreschool24yearsstrengthsanddifficultiesquestionnairein1yearoldchildren
AT gjmelendeztorres internalconsistencyandstructuralvalidityoftheparentreportpreschool24yearsstrengthsanddifficultiesquestionnairein1yearoldchildren