We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected]
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
Behavioural screening tools may be used to identify at-risk children in resource-limited settings in sub-Saharan Africa. The ASEBA forms (Child Behaviour Checklist and Youth Self-Report) are frequently translated and adapted for use in sub-Saharan African populations, but little is known about their measurement properties in these contexts.
Methods:
We conducted a systematic review of all published journal articles that used the ASEBA forms with sub-Saharan African samples. We evaluated the reported psychometric properties, as well as the methodological quality of the psychometric evaluations, using COSMIN (COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments) guidelines.
Results:
Fifty-eight studies reported measurement properties of the ASEBA forms. Most studies came from Southern (n = 29, 50%) or East African (n = 25, 43%) countries. Forty-nine studies (84%) used translated versions of the tool, but details regarding the translation process, if available, were often sparse. Most studies (n = 47, 81%) only reported internal consistency (using coefficient alpha) for one or more subscale. The methodological quality of the psychometric evaluations ranged from ‘very good’ to ‘inadequate’ across all measurement properties, except for internal consistency.
Conclusions:
There is limited good quality psychometric evidence available for the ASEBA forms in sub-Saharan Africa. We recommend (i) implementing a standardised procedure for conducting and reporting translation processes and (ii) conducting more comprehensive psychometric evaluations of the translated versions of the tools.
Recommend this
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.