Confirmatory factor analysis of the supports intensity scale for children

Abstract

Support needs assessment instruments and recent research related to this construct have been more focused on adults with intellectual disability than on children. However, the design and implementation of Individualized Support Plans (ISP) must start at an early age. Currently, a project for the translation, adaptation and validation of the supports intensity scale for children (SIS-C) is being conducted in Spain. In this study, the internal structure of the scale was analyzed to shed light on the nature of this construct when evaluated in childhood. A total of 814 children with intellectual disability between 5 and 16 years of age participated in the study. Their support need level was assessed by the SIS-C, and a confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), including different hypotheses, was carried out to identify the optimal factorial structure of this scale. The CFA results indicated that a unidimensional model is not sufficient to explain our data structure. On the other hand, goodness-of-fit indices showed that both correlated first-order factors and higher-order factor models of the construct could explain the data obtained from the scale. Specifically, a better fit of our data with the correlated first-order factors model was found. These findings are similar to those identified in previous analyses performed with adults. Implications and directions for further research are discussed.

Assessing support needs in children with intellectual disability and motor impairments: measurement invariance and group differences

“…The scale used was the SIS-C ( Thompson et al 2016) adapted to Spanish (Verdugo et al 2016;Verdugo et al 2017). It aims to assess the extraordinary support that children or adolescents (aged 5 to 16 years) with ID, in comparison with their peers without disabilities, need to participate successfully in different activities of their daily lives.…”

Cross-Cultural Adaptation and Evaluation of Psychometric Properties of Persian Version of Supports Intensity Scale among Adults with Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities

“…The results of a study by Verdugo et al (2016) on 814 subjects with intellectual and developmental disabilities in Spain showed that RMSEA indices with a value of 0.9, CFI with a value of approximately 0.99, and S-RMR with a value of 0.33 could support the hypothesis that the seven-factor model was the best and most suitable model for the SIS-A. In this seven-factor model, the factor load between the aspects and the total score of the SIS-A index was between 0.88 -0.98 which indicates a strong correlation between the aspects and the total score of SIS-A.…”

Perspectives on “Disease” and “Disability” in Child Health: The Case of Childhood Neurodisability

“…This is perhaps most clearly articulated in the approach advocated by American Association on Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities (AAIDD), using tools, such as the Supports Intensity Scale (74, 75), that clearly are idiographically informed. Though more adult oriented, this approach has increasing relevance and is being investigated psychometrically among children and youth with disabilities (76). …”

“…The questions asked will inform the choice of the tools to find answers. Other contemporary measurement tools designed to capture functional information, either in relation to ICF domains (101) or in terms of needed functional supports (74, 75), are presently available primarily for adults but are likely to prove useful as part of implementation of the disability perspective in child health with further validation in this population (76). …”

“…The first step toward this move will require conversations with policy and decision makers to explain the rationale based on the arguments made in this paper, including the notion of “disease and disability perspectives.” This is the responsibility of clinicians, educators, and leaders in health services research, who will also need the skills to anticipate “real world” political pressures that decision and policy makers confront from health condition-related activism. This process can align itself, when appropriate, with ongoing lobbying/advocacy on the part of groups, such as American Association for Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities, for increasing use of needs-based assessments that look at functional limitations, such as SIS (74–76, 110), but also with due consideration given to functional strengths, and not only within the child but also the family and, ultimately, the community.…”