AI summary · arXiv: 1702.03409v1 · q-bio.NC

Disruptive Behavior Disorder (DBD) Rating Scale for Georgian Population

Vera Bzhalava, Ketevan Inasaridze

Original paper · DOI Submitted to arXiv on 11 Feb. 2017 9 pages, 2 tables, 2 figures License: NONEXCLUSIVE-DISTRIB 1.0

The essentials

  • Researchers translated and adapted the DBD rating scale for assessing childhood behavioral abnormalities in Georgian children and adolescents
  • The scale was translated into Georgian using back translation techniques and checked by qualified psychologists and psychiatrists in Georgia
  • 290 children and adolescents between 6 to 16 years were recruited from public schools in Tbilisi and the Pediatric Clinic at Tbilisi State Medical University
  • Participants were assessed through interviews with parents/teachers and qualified psychologists in three different settings: school, home, and clinic
  • Children with ADHD had significantly higher scores on the DBD compared to typically developed individuals
  • Gender-wise prevalence was determined for children with ADHD, ODD, and CD revealing a higher prevalence among males compared to females across all categories investigated in this study.

Key points written by AI: they may contain errors, check them against the paper.

AI-generated keywords: DBD rating scale ADHD ODD CD gender differences

Read further

  • Comprehensive Summary
  • Layman's Summary
  • Blog article
  • Original abstract
In this study, researchers Vera Bzhalava and Ketevan Inasaridze translated and adapted the Parent/Teacher Disruptive Behavior Disorder (DBD) rating scale based on the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-IV-TR [APA, 2000]) for use in assessing childhood behavioral abnormalities, specifically ADHD, ODD, and CD, in Georgian children and adolescents. The DBD rating scale was translated into Georgian using back translation techniques by English language philologists and checked by qualified psychologists and psychiatrists in Georgia. A total of 290 children and adolescents between the ages of 6 to 16 years were recruited from public schools in Tbilisi and the Neurology Department of the Pediatric Clinic at Tbilisi State Medical University. Participants were objectively assessed through interviews with parents/teachers and qualified psychologists in three different settings: school, home, and clinic. The results showed statistically significant differences between healthy controls (M=27.71, SD=17.26) and those with ADHD (M=61.51, SD=22.79) in terms of DBD total scores. Additionally, statistically significant differences were found for the inattentive subtype between control (M=8.68, SD=5.68) and ADHD (M=18.15, SD=6.57) groups indicating that children with ADHD had higher scores on the DBD compared to typically developed individuals. Furthermore, gender-wise prevalence was determined for children with ADHD, ODD, and CD revealing a higher prevalence among males compared to females across all categories investigated in this study. Overall these findings suggest that the DBD rating scale can be effectively used to assess childhood behavioral abnormalities such as ADHD among Georgian children and adolescents while also highlighting important gender differences that should be taken into account when diagnosing these disorders in this population group.

Was this synthesis useful?

Score: 0

Why do we need votes?

Votes are used to determine whether we need to re-run our summarizing tools. If the count reaches -10, our tools can be restarted.

Ask questions about this paper to our AI assistant

You can also chat with multiple papers at once here.

⚠The license of the paper does not allow us to build upon its content and the AI assistant only knows about the paper metadata rather than the full article.

Figures and plots

Ask about a figure by number or use its question button to request visual analysis. Up to two figures and four image panels per question. Values read from plots are approximate; check the original data.

AI assistant instructions?

Tools for this paper

Explain it differently 3 free rewrites left today
Save to a collection Group papers in collections to compare them, chat with them and export them. Create a free account Log in

Advanced tools Premium

For researchers who follow a field closely: citation alerts, journal-club slides, version comparison and Zotero export. Discover Premium

Zotero
Citation alerts
Journal club Premium+ Slides to present it
For journalists Premium+ Press kit and hype check

Similar papers summarized with our AI tools

Navigate through even more similar papers through a

tree representation

The previous summary was created more than a year ago and can be re-run (if necessary) by clicking on the Run button below.

⚠The license of this specific paper does not allow us to build upon its content and the summarizing tools will be run using the paper metadata rather than the full article. However, it still does a good job, and you can also try our tools on papers with more open licenses.

Disclaimer: The AI-based summarization tool and virtual assistant provided on this website may not always provide accurate and complete summaries or responses. We encourage you to carefully review and evaluate the generated content to ensure its quality and relevance to your needs.