Psychometric properties of the Japanese ADHD-RS in preschool children.
Use the Japanese parent ADHD-RS, not the teacher form, when screening five-year-olds for ADHD in community settings.
01Research in Context
What this study did
Takayanagi et al. (2016) tested the Japanese parent and teacher ADHD Rating Scales on five-year-old children.
They checked if the scores were reliable and if the scale could tell ADHD apart from typical behavior.
What they found
The parent form worked well. It gave steady scores and clearly flagged the ADHD group.
The teacher form looked weaker and less consistent for this age.
How this fits with other research
Hua et al. (2015) saw the same split in China. Their parent DCDQ’07 worked for five- and six-year-olds but fell apart with four-year-olds.
Faso et al. (2016) in Serbia also found parents report more externalizing problems than teachers do on the CBCL/1.5-5.
Lee et al. (2023) struck out with the ToMI-2, showing not every preschool scale holds up. Together these studies warn: check both age and informant before you trust a translated form.
Why it matters
If you screen Japanese-speaking preschoolers, grab the parent ADHD-RS first. Skip the teacher version for five-year-olds—it may miss kids you need to flag. This saves you time and keeps referrals accurate.
Want CEUs on This Topic?
The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.
Join Free →Hand the Japanese parent ADHD-RS to families at intake and set aside the teacher form for now.
02At a glance
03Original abstract
BACKGROUND: Children with ADHD show multiple difficulties in their lives. Its early detection is important to provide timely intervention. AIMS: To evaluate the psychometric properties of the Japanese version of the home and school form of the ADHD-Rating Scale-IV (P- and T-ADHD-RS) for screening five-year-olds with ADHD. METHODS: The parents and teachers of 838 children (452 boys, 386 girls; including 28 boys, 18 girls diagnosed ADHD) completed the ADHD-RS and the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire in a community health check-up. RESULTS: The P- and T-ADHD-RS confirmed the two-factor model (Inattention and Hyperactivity-Impulsivity) and internal consistencies (CFI=0.968, 980; RMSEA=0.049, 0.055; SRMR=0.030, 0.024; α=0.86-.93). Japanese boys and girls scored significantly lower in all scales of the P- and T-ADHD-RS (d=0.65-1.14, 0.36-0.59) than US children. The P-ADHD-RS showed higher accuracy in area under the curve (AUC), sensitivity, and positive predictive value (PPV) than the T-ADHD-RS (AUC=0.955, 0.692; sensitivity=89.13%, 30.23%; PPV=46.59%, 16.05%). IMPLICATIONS: The P-ADHD-RS shows good reliability and validity for screening children with possible ADHD in a community. Longitudinal studies are needed to examine its predictive validity of adaptation in their lives at school.
Research in developmental disabilities, 2016 · doi:10.1016/j.ridd.2016.05.002