2015
DOI: 10.1007/s00127-015-1134-y
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The development and evaluation of the paediatric index of emotional distress (PI-ED)

Abstract: PurposeCurrent measures of anxiety and depression for children and young people (CYP) include somatic symptoms and can be lengthy. They can inflate scores in cases where there is also physical illness, contain potentially distressing symptoms for some settings and be impractical in clinical practice. The present study aimed to develop and evaluate a new questionnaire, the paediatric index of emotional distress (PI-ED), to screen for emotional distress in CYP, modelled on the hospital anxiety and depression sca… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
27
0
1

Year Published

2017
2017
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 34 publications
(29 citation statements)
references
References 39 publications
1
27
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Both questionnaires have 14 items, each scored up to three points, for a maximum score of 42. The HADS scale allocates 21 points for both anxiety and depression, with scores of 7 and below for each, considered normal, whilst a total score of 20 or below are considered normal PI‐ED scores …”
Section: Methodssupporting
confidence: 91%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Both questionnaires have 14 items, each scored up to three points, for a maximum score of 42. The HADS scale allocates 21 points for both anxiety and depression, with scores of 7 and below for each, considered normal, whilst a total score of 20 or below are considered normal PI‐ED scores …”
Section: Methodssupporting
confidence: 91%
“…The HADS scale allocates 21 points for both anxiety and depression, with scores of 7 and below for each, considered normal, 28 whilst a total score of 20 or below are considered normal PI-ED scores. 30 Lung function (forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1)) was measured by spirometry to determine disease severity in the study population and classified according to published categories in the Cystic Fibrosis Data Registry report: normal (90% of predicted FEV1 and above), mild impairment (below 90% but not below 70%), moderate impairment (below 70% but not below 40%) and severe impairment (below 40%). 31 The study received ethical approval from both The University of Notre Dame and Princess Margaret Hospital for Children and Telethon Kids Institute Ethics Committees.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Of the five respondents who reported the use of adult questionnaires, two reported that use was limited to older children. Paediatric questionnaires used were the Revised Children's Anxiety and Depression Scale (RCADS) [32], the Paediatric Index of Emotional Distress Questionnaire (PI-ED) [33], the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ) [34], and questionnaires for educational assessment. It is unknown if parent and/or child versions of the RCADS or SDQ were used.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The PI-ED has a clinical cut-off score of 20 [35], therefore all participants in this sample were classified as being in the 'non clinical' range, with their scores remaining stable post intervention and at 3-month follow-up. BDI-Y and BAI-Y scores from the screening data were compared to normative scores in the manual [22].…”
Section: Recruitment and Characteristics Of The Samplementioning
confidence: 99%