Assessment of Disruptive Behaviour Disorder, Academic Performance, and School Social Behaviour of Children

2019 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 24-55
Author(s):  
Mamoona Ismail Loona
Keyword(s):  
Academic Performance ◽  
Social Behaviour ◽  
Disruptive Behaviour ◽  
Behaviour Disorder ◽  
Disruptive Behaviour Disorder

P.7.b.004 Neurobiological correlates of disruptive behaviour disorder in a normal population; differences between boys and girls

2009 ◽  
Vol 19 ◽  
pp. S685-S686
Author(s):  
E. Platje ◽  
L.M.C. Jansen ◽  
R.R.J.M. Vermeiren ◽  
T.H.A.H. Doreleijers ◽  
P.A.C. van Lier ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Normal Population ◽  
Disruptive Behaviour ◽  
Population Differences ◽  
Behaviour Disorder ◽  
Disruptive Behaviour Disorder

scholarly journals Selective drop-out in longitudinal studies and non-biased prediction of behaviour disorders

2009 ◽  
Vol 195 (3) ◽  
pp. 249-256 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dieter Wolke ◽  
Andrea Waylen ◽  
Muthanna Samara ◽  
Colin Steer ◽  
Robert Goodman ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Longitudinal Study ◽  
Longitudinal Studies ◽  
Drop Out ◽  
Family Factors ◽  
Disruptive Behaviour ◽  
Behaviour Disorder ◽  
Disruptive Behaviour Disorder ◽  
Disruptive Behaviour Disorders ◽  
The Impact ◽  
In Pregnancy

BackgroundParticipant drop-out occurs in all longitudinal studies, and if systematic, may lead to selection biases and erroneous conclusions being drawn from a study.AimsWe investigated whether drop out in the Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents And Children (ALSPAC) was systematic or random, and if systematic, whether it had an impact on the prediction of disruptive behaviour disorders.MethodTeacher reports of disruptive behaviour among currently participating, previously participating and never participating children aged 8 years in the ALSPAC longitudinal study were collected. Data on family factors were obtained in pregnancy. Simulations were conducted to explain the impact of selective drop-out on the strength of prediction.ResultsDrop out from the ALSPAC cohort was systematic and children who dropped out were more likely to suffer from disruptive behaviour disorder. Systematic participant drop-out according to the family variables, however, did not alter the association between family factors obtained in pregnancy and disruptive behaviour disorder at 8 years of age.ConclusionsCohort studies are prone to selective drop-out and are likely to underestimate the prevalence of psychiatric disorder. This empirical study and the simulations confirm that the validity of regression models is only marginally affected despite range restrictions after selective drop-out.

Seclusion use with Children and Adolescents: An Australian Experience

2004 ◽  
Vol 38 (1-2) ◽  
pp. 26-33
Author(s):  
Michelle A. Fryer ◽  
Michael Beech ◽  
Gerard J. A. Byrne
Keyword(s):  
Children And Adolescents ◽  
Previous History ◽  
Disruptive Behaviour ◽  
Disruptive Behaviour Disorder ◽  
Restraint Use ◽  
Literature Searches ◽  
Increased Risk ◽  
Alternative Measures ◽  
History Of ◽  
Australian Experience

Objective To summarize the current state of knowledge on the use of seclusion and restraint with children and adolescents and to report the findings of an exploratory study to identify factors that place a child or adolescent at increased risk of seclusion during their admission. Method Literature searches were undertaken on MEDLINE, CINAHL and PsyclNFO databases. Articles were identified that focused specifically on seclusion and restraint use with children and adolescents or contained material significant to this population. The study reports findings from a retrospective review of patient charts, seclusion registers and staffing from an Australian acute inpatient facility. Results The data available in regard to seclusion use in this population is limited and flawed. Further research is needed on the use and outcomes of seclusion and restraint and on alternative measures in the containment of dangerousness. Both the literature and this study find that patients with certain factors are at increased risk of being secluded during an inpatient stay. These factors include being male, diagnoses of disruptive behaviour disorder and a previous history of physical abuse. Staffing factors did not show a relationship to the use of seclusion. Conclusions There are patient factors that predict increased risk of seclusion; these factors and their interrelationships require further elucidation. Further research is also needed on the outcomes, both positive and negative, of seclusion use and of alternatives to seclusion.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document