Source(s)

Curry, J. & Ilardi, S. (2000). Validity of the Devereux Scales of Mental Disorders with adolescent psychiatric inpatients. Journal of Clinical Child Psychology, 29, (4), 578-588. Retrieved from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11126635

Devereux- Behavior Rating Scales (2013). Retrieved from: http://www.devereux.org/site/PageServer?pagename=ictr_scale

Devereux Scales of Mental Disorders (DSMD). (2012). Retrieved from: http://pearsonassess.ca/haiweb/Cultures/en-CA/Products/Product+Detail.htm?CS_Category=&CS_Catalog=TPC-CACatalog&CS_ProductID=015-8048-008

Hussey, D. & Guo, S. (2003). Measuring behavior change in young children receiving intensive school-based mental health services. Journal of Community Psychology, 31(6), 629-639. Retrieved from: http://courses.csusm.edu/psyc340sr/articles/Longitudinal_study_conduct_disorder.pdf

Measure Profile: Devereux Scales of Mental Disorders (DSMD). (2012). Retrieved from: http://www.excellenceforchildandyouth.ca/support-tools/measure-profile?id=99

Smith, S. (2002). The concurrent validity of the Devereux Scales of Mental Disorders. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 20 (2), 112-127. Retrieved from: http://jpa.sagepub.com/content/20/2/112

Smith, S., Wingenfeld, S., Hilsenroth, M., Reddy, L., & LeBuffe, P. (2000). The use of the Devereux Scales of Mental Disorders in the assessment of Attention-Deficit/ Hyperactivity Disorder and Conduct Disorder. Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment, 22 (3), 237-255. Retrieved from: http://link.springer.com/article/10.1023%2FA%3A1007510216543#

Evaluation Methodology

“This measure may be used to assess specific psychopathologies in children and adolescents, to help formulate treatment/intervention plans based on specific psychopathologies, or to evaluate the outcome of a specific intervention/treatment program” (Measure Profile, 2012).

Measurement Characteristics

Purpose

“This measure is intended to assess emotional and behavioural symptoms of various psychopathologies in children and adolescents. It is NOT meant to be used as a diagnostic measure on its own”(Measure Profile, 2012).

Description

111 items. 5-point Likert scale from 0 (never) to 4 (very frequently) (Measure Profile, 2012).

(sub) Scales

Externalizing Disorders (Conduct and Attention/ Delinquency Scales), Internalizing Disorders (Anxiety and Depressions Scales), and Critical Pathology Disorders (Autism and Acute Problems Scales) (Devereux Scales of Mental Disorders, 2012)

Target Population

Children ages 5-18 (with forms specific to age 5-12 and 13-18) completed by parent or teacher of the child being assessed (Measure Profile, 2012).

Psychometric Properties

“3,152 children and adolescents from the United States. The sample approximates the demographic makeup of the U.S. population as per the 1990 Census”(Measure Profile, 2012)

“The authors report internal consistency reliabilities (alphas) of 0.70-0.98, inter-rater reliabilities of 0.44-0.66, and test-retest reliabilities of 0.61-0.97. Further studies have found alphas of 0.76-0.98“(Measure Profile, 2012)

“The authors report evidence of minimal convergent validity and discriminative validity. Further studies have found evidence of extensive concurrent and convergent validities, discriminative validity, and good sensitivity and specificity“(Measure Profile, 2012)

Administration Factors

15 minutes (Devereux Scales of Mental Disorders, 2012; Measure Profile, 2012)

Languages

English (Measure Profile, 2012).

Availability of Measure

Available from: http://pearsonassess.ca/haiweb/Cultures/en-CA/Products/Product+Detail.htm?CS_Category=&CS_Catalog=TPC-CACatalog&CS_ProductID=015-8048-008

Pros

Software available (Devereux Scales of Mental Disorders, 2012)

“Compares results across informants (e.g., teachers, parents). Assesses an individual in a variety of settings. Provides information for treatment planning. Evaluates behavior change as pre/post measure as a part of treatment outcome evaluation” (Devereux- Behavior Rating Scales, 2013).

“The DSMD was compared to the Child Behavior Checklist (CBCL; Achenbach, 1991) for diagnostic classification accuracy. The two measures were comparable in classifying oppositional or conduct disorder....The DSMD was superior for classification of substance abuse.” (Curry & Ilardi, 2000)

A study “designed to gather validity data on the Devereux Scales of Mental Disorders (DSMD) for distinguishing among children and adolescents with Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD; N = 32), Conduct Disorder (CD; N = 34), or no clinical diagnosis (NC; N = 65). Three types of indicators were compared: (a) DSMD scale, composite, and total scores, (b) the number of ADHD or CD-related items endorsed, and (c) diagnostic efficiency statistics (e.g., sensitivity, positive and negative predictive power). The clinical groups did not differ significantly from each other, but both were significantly higher than the NC group on all DSMD scales. Moreover, there were significant differences between the ADHD and the CD groups on the number of respective ADHD and CD-related items endorsed. A cut-off of seven to eight items yielded the best discrimination between the two diagnostic groups. Diagnostic efficiency statistics indicate that the DSMD may be effective at differentiating between similar disruptive behavior disorders” (Smith et al., 2000).

“Pre-test/ post-test score tables allowing for easy detection of significant score changes over time and simplifying treatment evaluation and program evaluation studies” (Devereux- Behavior Rating Scales, 2013).

In a study involving 201 students and their families examining behaviour change in young children receiving intensive school-based mental health services, students showed statistically significant improvement on the Externalizing Composite Score, Conduct Score, Attention Deficit Score, and Depression Score(Hussey & Guo, 2003).

Cons

Long

Likely better suited for more serious cases, and might not be the best choice to measure specific externalizing behaviours. “Specifically, relative to the other measures [BASC and CBCL], the DSMD appears to have some unique scales designed to detect more acute or serious pathology, whereas the BASC and CBCL may be better equipped to assess specific types of externalizing symptoms” (Smith, 2002).

“DSMD measures of conduct problems and delinquency were significantly associated with the predicted parent-report, interview-based, and diagnostic measures of conduct disorder and substance abuse and not with any measures of anxiety or depression. DSMD measures of anxiety and depression were related to other parent-report ratings of internalizing symptoms but had more limited convergent and discriminant validity.” (Curry & Ilardi, 2000)

“The DSMD was compared to the Child Behavior Checklist (CBCL; Achenbach, 1991) for diagnostic classification accuracy... The CBCL was superior for classification of major depression.” (Curry & Ilardi, 2000)

In a study involving 201 students and their families examining behaviour change in young children receiving intensive school-based mental health services,40.3% fell in the borderline or ‘normal’ range for the Total Score rating pre-program (Hussey & Guo, 2003).

In a study involving 201 students and their families examining behaviour change in young children receiving intensive school-based mental health services, students did not show statistically significant improvement on the Total Score, the Internalizing Composite Score, Critical Pathology Composite Score, Anxiety Score, Acute Score or Autism Score.(Hussey & Guo, 2003).