Raw data for meta-analysis of discriminative validity of caregiver, youth, and teacher report for pediatric bipolar disorder -- all English publications through End of 2014 (ICPSR 36245)

Version Date: Aug 17, 2015

Cite this study |

Principal Investigator(s):
Eric A. Youngstrom, University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill

https://doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR36245.v1

Version V1

Slide tabs to view more

Summary

Objective: To meta-analyze the diagnostic efficiency of checklists for discriminating pediatric bipolar disorder (PBD) from other conditions. Hypothesized moderators included (a) informant - we predicted caregiver report would produce larger effects than youth or teacher report; (b) scale content - scales that include manic symptoms should be more discriminating; and (c) sample design - samples that include healthy control cases or impose stringent exclusion criteria are likely to produce inflated effect sizes.

Methods: Searches in PsycINFO, PubMed, and GoogleScholar generated 4094 hits. Inclusion criteria were (1) sufficient statistics to estimate a standardized effect size, (2) age 18 years or less, and (3) at least 10 cases (4) with diagnoses of PBD based on semi-structured diagnostic interview. Multivariate mixed regression models accounted for nesting of multiple effect sizes from different informants or scales within the same sample.

Results: Data included 63 effect sizes from 8 rating scales across 27 separate samples (N=11,941 youths, 1,834 with PBD). The average effect size was g=1.05. Random effect variance components within study and between study were significant, ps<.00005. Informant, scale content, and sample design all explained significant unique variance, even after controlling for design and reporting quality.

Discussion: Checklists have clinical utility for assessing PBD. Caregiver reports discriminated PBD significantly better than teacher and youth self report, although all three showed discriminative validity. Studies using "distilled" designs with healthy control comparison groups, or stringent exclusion criteria, produced significantly larger effect size estimates that could lead to inflated false positive rates if used as described in clinical practice.

Citation

Youngstrom, Eric A. Raw data for meta-analysis of discriminative validity of caregiver, youth, and teacher report for pediatric bipolar disorder -- all English publications through End of 2014. Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor], 2015-08-17. https://doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR36245.v1

Export Citation:

  • RIS (generic format for RefWorks, EndNote, etc.)
  • EndNote

Subject Terms

Geographic Coverage

Smallest Geographic Unit

Effect size (Country of origin)

Restrictions

This dataset is part of ICPSR's Archives of Scientific Psychology journal database. Users should contact the Editorial Office at the American Psychological Association for information on requesting data access.

Distributor(s)

Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research
Hide

Time Period(s)

1990 -- 2014

Date of Collection

2013-09 -- 2015-06
Hide

Sample

Systematic review

Universe

Youths ages 5-18 evaluated via caregiver, teacher, or youth checklists.

Unit(s) of Observation

Effect size for scale (often nested within sample)

Presence of Common Scales

QUADAS2 and Kowatch for study quality; Hedges' g for effect size.

Hide

Original Release Date

2015-08-17

Version History

2018-02-15 The citation of this study may have changed due to the new version control system that has been implemented. The previous citation was:

  • Youngstrom, Eric A. Raw data for meta-analysis of discriminative validity of caregiver, youth, and teacher report for pediatric bipolar disorder -- all English publications through End of 2014. ICPSR36245-v1. Ann Arbor, MI: Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor], 2015-08-17. http://doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR36245.v1

Hide

Weight

Inverse variance weighting, as standard when meta-analyzing standardized mean differences such as Hedges' g.

Hide

Notes

  • This dataset is part of ICPSR's Archives of Scientific Psychology journal database. Users should contact the Editorial Office at the American Psychological Association for information on requesting data access.

  • The public-use data files in this collection are available for access by the general public. Access does not require affiliation with an ICPSR member institution.

  • ICPSR usually offers files in multiple formats for researchers to be able to access data and documentation in formats that work well within their needs. If you have questions about the accessibility of materials distributed by ICPSR or require further assistance, please visit ICPSR’s Accessibility Center.

  • One or more files in this data collection have special restrictions. Restricted data files are not available for direct download from the website; click on the Restricted Data button to learn more.

APA logo

Archives of Scientific Psychology

This dataset is made available in connection to an article in Archives of Scientific Psychology, the first open-access, open-methods journal of the American Psychological Association (APA). Archiving and dissemination of this research is part of APA's commitment to collaborative data sharing.