Content area
Full text
Contents
- Abstract
- The Present Review
- Correspondence in Multi-Informant Clinical Child Assessments
- Meta-Analysis of the Last Quarter-Century of Cross-Informant Correspondence Studies
- Method
- Literature Review
- Inclusion and Exclusion Criteria
- Data Extraction and Covariates Coded From Each Study
- Data-Analytic Strategy
- Results and Discussion
- Overall Effect Sizes
- Heterogeneity in Effect Sizes and Stability of Results
- Effects of Covariates
- Conceptual Foundations of Multi-Informant Mental Health Assessments
- Operations Triad Model
- Predictions About the Incremental and Construct Validity of Multi-Informant Assessments
- Considering Constructs Other Than Context When Interpreting Informants’ Reports
- Clinical severity
- Informants’ perspectives and rater biases
- Measurement error
- False-positive and false-negative reports
- Informants’ cognitive abilities and social desirability
- Incremental Validity in Multi-Informant Mental Health Assessments
- Theoretical and Methodological Approaches to Incremental Validity
- Expertise in assessment
- Criterion variables and criterion contamination
- Incremental Validity in Multi-Informant Clinical Child Assessments
- Measurement method of informants’ reports evaluated for incremental validity
- Mental health domain or focus of assessments
- Criterion variables and criterion contamination
- Construct Validity of Multi-Informant Mental Health Assessments
- Theoretical and Methodological Approaches to Construct Validity
- Construct Validity in Multi-Informant Clinical Child Assessments
- Discussion
- Main Findings
- Recommendations for Clinical Practice
- Using multi-informant assessments to personalize patient care
- Developing new multi-informant assessment procedures
- Integrating the OTM with approaches from evidence-based medicine
- Research and Theoretical Implications
- Addressing methodological issues raised by incremental validity research
- Using basic mental health research to inform incremental validity research
- Expanding construct validity research on multi-informant assessments to additional clinical domains and developmental periods
- Concluding Comments
Figures and Tables
Abstract
Child and adolescent patients may display mental health concerns within some contexts and not others (e.g., home vs. school). Thus, understanding the specific contexts in which patients display concerns may assist mental health professionals in tailoring treatments to patients’ needs. Consequently, clinical assessments often include reports from multiple informants who vary in the contexts in which they observe patients’ behavior (e.g., patients, parents, teachers). Previous meta-analyses indicate that informants’ reports correlate at low-to-moderate magnitudes. However, is it valid to interpret low correspondence among reports as indicating that patients display concerns in some contexts and not others? We meta-analyzed 341 studies published between 1989 and 2014 that reported cross-informant correspondence estimates, and observed low-to-moderate...