Inter-rater reliability and aspects of validity of the parent-infant relationship global assessment scale (PIR-GAS)

Abstract

BackgroundThe Parent-Infant Relationship Global Assessment Scale (PIR-GAS) signifies a conceptually relevant development in the multi-axial, developmentally sensitive classification system DC:0-3R for preschool children. However, information about the reliability and validity of the PIR-GAS is rare. A review of the available empirical studies suggests that in research, PIR-GAS ratings can be based on a ten-minute videotaped interaction sequence. The qualification of raters may be very heterogeneous across studies.MethodsTo test whether the use of the PIR-GAS still allows for a reliable assessment of the parent-infant relationship, our study compared a PIR-GAS ratings based on a full-information procedure across multiple settings with ratings based on a ten-minute video by two doctoral candidates of medicine. For each mother-child dyad at a family day hospital (N = 48), we obtained two video ratings and one full-information rating at admission to therapy and at discharge. This pre-post design allowed for a replication of our findings across the two measurement points. We focused on the inter-rater reliability between the video coders, as well as between the video and full-information procedure, including mean differences and correlations between the raters. Additionally, we examined aspects of the validity of video and full-information ratings based on their correlation with measures of child and maternal psychopathology.ResultsOur results showed that a ten-minute video and full-information PIR-GAS ratings were not interchangeable. Most results at admission could be replicated by the data obtained at discharge. We concluded that a higher degree of standardization of the assessment procedure should increase the reliability of the PIR-GAS, and a more thorough theoretical foundation of the manual should increase its validity.

Is a mother's recalled parental rearing behavior, her attributions of her child's behavior, and her psychopathology associated with her mother–child relationship quality?

“…Because of the limited number of validity studies on the applied measures, it may be premature to conclude which measure is superior. One explanation for the low association between the PIR‐GAS, PET, and the Multiperspective Parent – Child Relationship Questionnaire is the unknown degree of measurement error in PIR‐GAS, which cannot be assessed by a single‐item measure (for further limitations, see Evangelista & McLellan, ; Müller et al., ). However, PIR‐GAS has shown specific validity for children's physically violent experiences (Hatzinikolaou et al., ).…”

“…The Parent – Infant Relationship Global Assessment Scale (PIR‐GAS; Zero to Three, , ) is a clinical one‐item‐rating instrument that is used to assess the parent–child relationship on a scale from 1 (documented maltreatment) to 100 (well‐adapted) with descriptions and examples for each 10‐point step on the scale but without an explicit description of the observed setting (Müller et al., ). The interrater reliability of this instrument has been tested in different countries with satisfying results ( r = .83 (Aoki, Zeanah, Heller, & Bakshi, ); Kendall's Tau‐b between .54 and .96 (Hatzinikolaou et al., )).…”

Motherhood in women with motor disability due to a rare disease: an exploratory observational study of childbirth, infant development, and mother-infant interactions

“…Mother infant relationship was assessed by LB based on clinical evaluation using the parent-infant relationship global assessment scale (PIR-GAS) (17). The PIR-GAS allows for a global rating of the quality of a parent-infant (or parentchild) relationship on a numerical scale, with higher scores indicating higher relationship quality.…”

DEFINING RELATIONAL PATHOLOGY IN EARLY CHILDHOOD: THE DIAGNOSTIC CLASSIFICATION OF MENTAL HEALTH AND DEVELOPMENTAL DISORDERS OF INFANCY AND EARLY CHILDHOOD DC:0–5 APPROACH

“…Most concerning about the entire Axis II of the DC:0–3 , given its novelty and seeming centrality to the field of infant mental health, is how little research it inspired. A smattering of studies have examined reliability and validity of the PIRGAS as a scale (Aoki, Zeanah, Heller, & Bakshi, ; Muller et al., ; Salomonsson & Sandell, a, ), but there have been almost no attempts to assess the value of the typology of relationship disorders nor whether, for example, a rating of 40 on the PIRGAS is appropriate as a cutpoint for specifying relationship disorders.…”