The Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire self-report-, parent-, and teacher version in children with intellectual and developmental disabilities.
Parent SDQ scores are the least shaky option for kids with IDD, yet still below par.
01Research in Context
What this study did
The team checked if the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire works for kids with IDD. They tested three versions: what the kids say, what parents say, and what teachers say. the children with intellectual or developmental disabilities took part.
They ran math tests to see if each version gives steady scores and if the questions hang together. They also checked if the three versions tell the same story about each child.
What they found
Parent reports came out best, but still only so-so. The kids' own answers were weak and shaky. Teacher reports landed in the middle.
None of the three versions passed the usual rules for good tests. The questions did not group the way the test makers said they would.
How this fits with other research
Older work looks brighter. Koegel et al. (1992) found seven social tests that held up well in teens with ID. Smith et al. (2010) also got solid numbers for their new self-report scales in adults with ID.
The difference is age. Sabine worked with children, while the older studies tested teens or adults. Kids with ID lower IQs may simply struggle to rate their own feelings.
Lunsky et al. (2011) adds another clue. They saw that Home and Classroom forms of the Sensory Processing Measure gave different pictures of the same child. This matches Sabine’s finding that parents, teachers, and kids rarely agree.
Why it matters
If you use the SDQ with kids who have IDD, lean on the parent form but treat the scores as rough guides, not facts. Do not rely on child self-report until the child shows clear yes/no understanding in practice trials.
Want CEUs on This Topic?
The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.
Join Free →Pilot the parent SDQ with one client this week, then double-check any high scores with direct observation before writing goals.
02At a glance
03Original abstract
BACKGROUND: The Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ) is a frequently used behavioral screening instrument. However, its psychometric properties have been rarely examined among children with intellectual and developmental disabilities (IDD). AIMS: The main aims of this study were to examine the internal consistency (i.e., McDonald's Omega), the convergent validity (by correlating the Total difficulties score with the Aberrant Behavior Checklist [ABC]), the divergent validity (by correlating the Total difficulties score with the Vineland Adaptive Behavior Composite; VABS-II Total) and the factorial validity (by the means of confirmatory factor analyses [CFA]) of the SDQ self-report-, parent-, and teacher version in a sample of children with IDD. METHOD: Participants were 365 children and adolescents (males n = 238; 65 %) aged 4-18 years (M = 10.11, SD = 3.82) referred for a developmental/neurological assessment to the neuropediatric outpatient clinics in the specialist health services. The SDQ was filled inn by 115 children, 337 parents, and 248 teachers. RESULTS: McDonald's Omega was overall lowest for the self-report version. Correlations of the SDQ Total difficulties score and the ABC subscales were strongest for the parent version. The results of the CFA indicated best model fit for the six-factor model that included a method factor for all three versions of the SDQ, however, model fit was overall not good. CONCLUSIONS: Further research that examines the psychometric properties of the SDQ among multiple informants in large samples of children with IDD is needed.
Research in developmental disabilities, 2022 · doi:10.1016/j.ridd.2022.104194