A Dutch version of the Reiss Screen of Maladaptive Behavior.

English et al. (1995) translated the Reiss Screen for Maladaptive Behavior into Dutch. They gave the 38-item checklist to the adults with intellectual disability living in Dutch residential centers. Two staff members who knew each adult filled out the form. The team then checked if the total score and six sub-scales gave steady answers and matched clinical records.

The total score held together well (alpha = 0.87). Scores also lined up with psychiatrist diagnoses, so the screen flagged people who truly had mental-health issues. Sub-scales were shakier: four of the six dropped below the 0.70 rule-of-thumb. Agreement between two staff members was only fair (kappa around 0.40).

Seven years later Oliver et al. (2002) ran the same steps in Sweden and saw the same pattern. Both studies say: total score is solid, item-by-item agreement is modest. The repeat gives you confidence that the Reiss Screen works across languages.

Carretti et al. (2013) tested a different Dutch tool for frailty in adults with ID. Their inter-rater numbers were much higher (kappa > 0.75). The gap reminds us that the Reiss Screen’s lower agreement is tied to judging internal behaviors like anxiety, not to the Dutch language or culture.

Lancioni et al. (2006) mapped real-world psychiatric diagnoses in Dutch adults with ID. Men showed more personality disorders, women more mood and dementia. Because the Dutch Reiss Screen can capture these conditions, you can use it to watch for the same gender pattern in your own caseload.

You now have a free, 10-minute Dutch screen that signals when to refer for full mental-health work-ups. Use the total score; take single sub-scale scores with caution. Always have a second rater when possible, and expect some false negatives on internalizing problems.