Taxometric analyses and predictive accuracy of callous-unemotional traits regarding quality of life and behavior problems in non-conduct disorder diagnoses

Abstract

Callous-unemotional (CU) traits have mainly been studied in relation to conduct disorder (CD), but can also occur in other disorder groups. However, it is unclear whether there is a clinically relevant cut-off value of levels of CU traits in predicting reduced quality of life (QoL) and clinical symptoms, and whether CU traits better fit a categorical (taxonic) or dimensional model. Parents of 979 youths referred to a child and adolescent psychiatric clinic rated their child's CU traits on the Inventory of Callous-Unemotional traits (ICU), QoL on the Kidscreen-27, and clinical symptoms on the Child Behavior Checklist. Experienced clinicians conferred DSM-IV-TR diagnoses of ADHD, ASD, anxiety/mood disorders and DBD-NOS/ODD. The ICU was also used to score the DSM-5 specifier 'with limited prosocial emotions' (LPE) of Conduct Disorder. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analyses revealed that the predictive accuracy of the ICU and LPE regarding QoL and clinical symptoms was poor to fair, and similar across diagnoses. A clinical cut-off point could not be defined. Taxometric analyses suggested that callous-unemotional traits on the ICU best reflect a dimension rather than taxon. More research is needed on the impact of CU traits on the functional adaptation, course, and response to treatment of non-CD conditions.

Assessing Callous–Unemotional Traits in 6- to 18-Year-Olds: Reliability, Validity, Factor Structure, and Norms of the German Version of the Inventory of Callous–Unemotional Traits

“…Most reliability studies of the ICU (total scale) were done on the self-report version and, to a lesser degree, the parent-report version. In culturally diverse samples, the internal consistency of the ICU was found to be acceptable to good with α = .71 to .90 for the self-report version (Berg et al, 2013; Colins et al, 2016; Decuyper, De Bolle, De Fruyt, & De Clercq, 2011; Decuyper, De Caluwe, De Clercq, & De Fruyt, 2014; Eisenbarth, Demetriou, Kyranides, & Fanti, 2016; Essau et al, 2006; Fanti et al, 2009; Feilhauer, Cima, & Arntz, 2012; Kimonis et al, 2015; Kimonis, Kennealy, & Goulter, 2016; Kongerslev, Bo, Forth, & Simonsen, 2015; Latzman, Lilienfeld, Latzman, & Clark, 2013; Levy et al, 2017; Lopez-Romero, Gomez-Fraguela, & Romero, 2015; Marsee et al, 2011; Pechorro et al, 2016; Ray, Pechorro, & Goncalves, 2016; Roose et al, 2010; White, Frick, Lawing, & Bauer, 2013) and α = .70 to .89 for the parent-report version (Decuyper et al, 2011; Decuyper et al, 2014; Henry, Pingault, Boivin, Rijsdijk, & Viding, 2016; Herpers et al, 2017; Latzman et al, 2013; McDonald et al, 2018). Only one study from Israel tested the teacher-report version in an at-risk sample of adolescent males and reported a good internal consistency (α = .86; Levy et al, 2017).…”

Callous-unemotional traits and brain structure: Sex-specific effects in anterior insula of typically-developing youths

“…CU-traits in youths without DBDs have for example been related to subclinical variations of antisocial behavior, impairments affecting peer relationships, quality of life, hyperactivity and increased risk-taking ( Barker et al, 2011 , Frick et al, 2003 , Herpers et al, 2016 , Pardini and Fite, 2010 ); for a review see ( Viding and McCrory, 2012 ). CU-traits in youths with or without conduct problems are highly heritable and may carry independent diagnostic value ( Barker et al, 2011 , Frick et al, 2003 , Herpers et al, 2017 , Kumsta et al, 2012 , Rowe et al, 2010a , Viding and McCrory, 2012 ).…”

Mindfulness for children with ADHD and Mindful Parenting (MindChamp): Protocol of a randomised controlled trial comparing a family Mindfulness-Based Intervention as an add-on to care-as-usual with care-as-usual only

“…For children aged eleven and older we will use the 24-item Inventory of Callous-Unemotional Traits (ICU) assessing uncaring, callousness and unemotional traits. The Dutch version shows a good internal consistency (α = .89) [ 130 ]. Self-compassion will be assessed by using one item per subscale of the Self-Compassion Scale [ 131 ] with the highest factor loading [ 132 ].…”