Hindi Adaptation of Pediatric Symptom Checklist-Youth Version (PSC-Y)

Cross-cultural validation: Sinhala versions of pediatric symptom checklists for screening adolescent psychosocial problems

“…The test-retest reliability correlation coefficient of 0.90 for the total S-PSC after a two-week gap was comparable to the original authors' finding of 0.86 after a four-week gap (33,40). The US (48) and Korean studies (45) The internal consistency of the S/PSC-Y was found to have a Cronbach's alpha coefficient of 0.88, which is consistent with previous validation studies conducted in India and Botswana (17,24,44). The internalizing, externalizing, and attention subscales had Cronbach's alpha coefficients of 0.75, 0.79, and 0.71, respectively, which were similar to the Spanish validation study results with the same item domains (51).…”

“…The original recommended cut-off values for the PSC and PSC-Y were ≥28 and ≥30 (24,25), respectively, with subscale cut-off scores of 5, 7, and 7 for internalizing, externalizing, and attention problems (26,27). However, the present study found lower cut-off scores for the PSC-Y, which have also been observed in studies conducted in Mexico, Turkey and India, with proposed cut-off scores ranging from 12 to 26 (17,(28)(29)(30). Differences in the way symptoms are expressed and emotional distress is somatised across cultures can lead to lower cut-off scores in psychometric tests (30)(31)(32).…”

“…The sample size was calculated using the formula proposed by Hulley et al (15). The expected sensitivity and specificity for both tools were determined based on previous validation studies by Navon et al (16) and Chaurasia et al (17), with 91% sensitivity and 68% specificity for PSC and 96% sensitivity and 79% specificity for PSC-Y. A precision level of 0.2 was set, and a non-response rate of 10% was assumed.…”

Validating the Teacher Version of Pediatric Symptom Checklist–17 in Chinese Elementary Schools

“…The scale was later adapted for use with teachers and for self-reporting by older children. Over the past decades, the PSC has become one of the most frequently recommended measures, being translated into more than two dozen languages and widely used in research and clinical settings (Bergmann et al, 2020; Chaurasiya et al, 2019). Notably, there are two versions of the PSC: the original 35-item version (PSC-35) and a shorter 17-item version (PSC-17; Gardner et al, 1999).…”

“…The scale has been documented to be a reliable and valid tool for assessing psychosocial risk in the general child population, as well as in specific populations (e.g., pediatric population with epilepsy; Blucker et al, 2014; Erdogan & Ozturk, 2011; Liu, Burgess, et al, 2020; Wagner et al, 2015). Up to now, the psychometric properties of the PSC-17 have been established in diverse populations, including but not limited to the United States (Liu, Burgess et al, 2020), India (Chaurasiya et al, 2019), China (Liu et al, 2022), and Turkey (Erdogan & Ozturk, 2011). More importantly, the free nature of the PSC-17 does not bring a financial burden on institutions such as the government, schools, and hospitals for screening children’s psychosocial risk.…”