Accuracy of assessment: the discriminative and predictive power of the Eyberg Child Behavior Inventory

Abstract

ObjectiveThe discriminative and predictive power of the Eyberg Child Behavior Inventory (ECBI) was assessed using revised clinical cut-off scores. Sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive power were calculated to evaluate the effectiveness of the revised score in screening children for treatment of disruptive behavior problems. SampleParticipants were drawn from archival samples of 196 children aged 3-6 whose mothers had completed an ECBI. The disruptive behavior group (n = 98) consisted of children referred for psychological treatment who met diagnostic criteria for Oppositional Defiant Disorder or Conduct Disorder. The non-diagnosed group (n = 98) consisted of children visiting pediatric clinics whose mothers did not check the box on their demographic information questionnaire endorsing the presence of behavior problems. DesignChildren in the non-diagnosed group were selected to match the disruptive behavior group on socio-economic status, age, and sex. The mothers' scores on the ECBI Intensity Scale were used to calculate the sensitivity and specificity, positive and negative predictive power, and kappa of the ECBI. ResultsThe ECBI Intensity Scale correctly classified 91% of the children, with 96% of the diagnosed children correctly classified and 87% of the non-diagnosed children correctly classified. Implications forThis study further validates the ECBI for use as a screening measure for practice children in pediatric settings who require further evaluation or treatment for disruptive behavior problems.

Parenting Scale: Which Version Should We Use?

“…Parents rate the frequency of disruptive, externalizing behavior in their children on a 7-point scale from never to always (Intensity Scale). The ECBI has high internal consistency and stability (Eyberg and Pincus 1999) as well as high discriminative and predictive validity (Rich and Eyberg 2001). In this study, we used an adaptation of ECBI, which retains 22 items from the original 36 (ECBI-22;Burns and Patterson 2000).…”

Adapting Parent–Child Interaction Therapy to Foster Care

“…The ECBI yields an Intensity Scale that indicates the frequency of a child's problem behaviors, and a Problem Scale that indicates parent tolerance and distress associated with the behaviors. Among representative samples, the ECBI has been shown to have good properties of test-retest reliability (a ¼ .86-.88), internal consistency (a ¼ .88-.95), and concurrent validity with other validated measures (Boggs, Eyberg, & Reynolds, 1990;Rich & Eyberg, 2001). The ECBI also has demonstrated sound reliability and validity with African American and Latino samples (Gross et al, 2007).…”

Maintenance of Treatment Gains: A Comparison of Enhanced, Standard, and Self-directed Triple P-Positive Parenting Program

“…Subsequently mothers completed and returned three questionnaires (see below) that assessed child behaviour, marital conflict, and depression. For inclusion in the study, mothers had to rate their child's behaviour as being in the elevated range on the Eyberg Child Behaviour Inventory (ECBI Intensity score > 127 or Problem score > 11; Eyberg and Ross 1978), a measure which has been shown to powerfully discriminate and predict diagnosed disruptive disorders in the preschool period (Rich and Eyberg 2001). They were also required to have at least one of the following family adversity factors: (a) maternal depression as measured by a score of 20 or more on the Beck Depression Inventory (Beck et al 1979); (b) relationship conflict as measured by a score of 5 or more on the Parent Problem Checklist (Dadds and Powell 1991); (c) single parent household; (d) low gross family income (less than AUD$345 per week) or low occupational prestige as indicted by a rating of 5.0 or higher for the major income earner on the Power, Privilege and Prestige Scale (Daniel 1983).…”