Initial test of a new risk-need assessment instrument for youths with or at risk for conduct problems: ESTER-assessment

Andershed, Henrik; Fredriksson, Jennie; Engelholm, Karin; Ahlberg, Rickard; Berggren, Steve; Andershed, Anna‐Karin

doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.07.129

Cited by 3 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The findings of the present study are to a large extent consistent with the results of the previous study on the inter-rater reliability of ESTER-assessment [24] where ICC's were fair to good and the percentage scores were generally quite similar as in the present study. In comparison with other instruments, such as EARL-20B and 21G and SAVRY, the inter-rater reliability of ESTERassessment presents comparable degrees of agreement, with a tendency toward a somewhat lower agreement.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 92%

“…Total disagreement (i.e., when rater A assesses a factor as "0" and rater B assesses the same factor as "4", or vice versa) was present in only two of the 19 factors one time each (Factor 4 "Insufficient verbal abilities or school performance" and Factor 6 "Depressive mood or self harming behavior"). In conclusion, this first study showed acceptable inter-rater reliability and close to as good percentage agreement on individual factors as the studies on SAVRY and EARL-20B and 21G [24]. This is quite striking because SAVRY uses three-and twostep scales on its factors and the EARL instruments a threestep scale.…”

supporting

confidence: 62%

“…The ESTER-assessments were conducted on fileinformation of 30 girls who had been incarcerated in an institution for youths in Sweden. Twenty-two of those girls participated in the initial study on the inter-rater reliability of ESTER-assessment [24]. Eight of the girls' file information were not possible to access for the present study.…”

Section: Subjectsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…An initial test of the inter-reliability of the five-step scale of ESTER-assessment has previously been conducted [24]. This previous study was based on ESTER-assessments conducted by two independent raters using file-information of 30 girls, between 16 and 19-years old, incarcerated for serious psychosocial problems, criminal behavior or drug abuse.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The present study aims to test the inter-rater reliability of ESTER-assessment under similar conditions as the initial study [24] but with other raters. The present study partly uses the same sample as in the initial study but two other raters with the main question being whether the inter-rater reliability of ESTER-assessment can be generalized to other raters.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Further Testing of the Inter-rater Reliability of ESTER-assessment − a Risk-need Assessment Instrument for Youths with or at Risk for Conduct Problems

Bond¹,

Rudenhed²,

Bergquist³

et al. 2013

AJAP

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Behavioral problems in childhood have been associated with conduct problems later in life. Thus, it is essential that youths with or at risk for conduct problems receive the help they need on time. Therefore, youth with or at risk for conduct problem must receive effective risk-need assessments and intervention plans regardless the person who conducts the assessment. ESTER-assessment is a structured, computer-aided, risk-need instrument developed for assessing youth (0-18) with or at risk for conduct problems. It uses a five-step response scale to assess 19 research-based risk and protective factors and the present study tests the inter-rater reliability of these 19 factors. This was done by comparing the assessments conducted by two independent raters who assessed the file information of 30 girls (mean age = 16.9) who had been incarcerated due to psychosocial problems, criminality and/or drug abuse. Results showed fair to good agreement for the majority of the factors via intra-class correlations and percentage agreement varied on the 19 factors from 24.1 to 80.8 % for exact agreement and from 72.2 to 96.7 % for exact agreement or difference by one step on the response scale. We conclude that it is possible to gain acceptable to excellent inter-rater reliability in assessing risk and protective factors via ESTERassessment.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 92%

supporting

confidence: 62%

Section: Subjectsmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations