To their surprise, the two sociologists observed that visitors spent longest looking at a couple of rather academic items, apparently of secondary interest, by Pierre Révoil and François Marius Granet, respectively.
As predicted, adjusting protocols for the presence of language and academic items improved accuracy.
What impact does removing language and academic items from protocols have on the diagnostic accuracy of ADHD symptom scales?
Finally, we predicted that removing language and academic items from symptom scales would result in improved diagnostic precision.
The third research question regarding the consequence of removing overlapping language and academic items from the protocols was addressed in the last two steps of data reduction.
Most of the observed differences between ratings provided for the SLI and TD groups were not significant when nonverbal IQ was treated as a covariate or when syndrome scales were adjusted for the presence of language and academic items.
These findings suggest that removing language and academic items increased specificity for the Withdrawn, Social Problems, Attention Problems, DSM-Inattentive, and DSM-Total with only modest tradeoffs in sensitivity.
Reflecting the absence of significant differences on ALEQ total under-reporting between mothers with a history of MDD versus no history, there were no group differences on under-reporting of ALEQ Family items (t = 1.75, p = .08), Academic items (t = 1.03, p = .31), or Social items (t = .50, p = .62).62
Removing language and academic items from the Cognitive Problems/Inattention syndrome scale of the CPRS-R L resulted in a more dramatiCPRS-R Lion in the numberesultedldren from the SLingroup identified as within clinical levels of concern (fromore to 4 cases).
For example, in one pre-academic item on simple addition, four sub-items were included.
