Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Self-reported strengths and difficulties in a large Norwegian population 10–19 years

Age and gender specific results of the extended SDQ-questionnaire

  • ORIGINAL CONTRIBUTION
  • Published:
European Child & Adolescent Psychiatry Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This study reports young people’s assessment of own problems and strengths from a Norwegian survey (n=29,631, age range 10–19), based on the self-report version of the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (response rate 84.3%). Differences according to the age and gender are illuminated. Girls reported most emotional problems and boys most conduct and peer problems. Compared to other countries, Norwegian adolescents reported more hyperactive behaviour. Total problem scores were highest in early-adolescence for boys (Mean=10.8, SD=6.1), and for girls it is in late adolescence (Mean 11.3, SD=5.2). One third of the subjects reported at least minor perceived difficulties. All symptom scales were strongly associated with perceived difficulties, impact and burden to others (P<0.001) with significant gender and age effects. Impact scores were included in the estimate of possible caseness. Combining symptom scores and impact scores, 3.7% of the sample was defined as a high risk group, while 8.8% needed special attention from mental health services. The results also suggested that SDQ could be a valuable screening instrument for older adolescents.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Becker A, Hagenberg N, Roessner V, Woerner W, Rothenberger A (2004) Evaluation of the self-reported SDQ in a clinical setting: do self-reports tell us more than ratings by adult informants? Eur Child Adolesc Psychiatry 13(Suppl 2):II17–II24

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Biederman J, Mick E, Faraone SV, Braaten E, Doyle A, Spencer T, Wilens TE, Frazier E, Johnson MA (2002) Influence of gender on attention deficit hyperactivity disorder in children referred to a psychiatric clinic. Am J Psychiatry 159:36–42

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Deater-Deckard K (2001) Annotation: recent research examining the role of peer relationships in the development of psychopathology. J Child Psychol Psychiatry 42:565–579

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Ford T, Goodman R, Meltzer H (2003) The British Child and Adolescent Mental Health Survey 1999: the prevalence of DSM-IV disorders. J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry 42:1203–1211

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Goodman R (1997) The Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire: a research note. J Child Psychol Psychiatry 38:581–586

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Goodman R (1999) The extended version of the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire as a guide to child psychiatric caseness and consequent burden. J Child Psychol Psychiatry 40:791–799

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Goodman R (2001) Psychometric properties of the strengths and difficulties questionnaire. J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry 40:1337–1345

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Goodman R, Ford T, Corbin T, Meltzer H (2004) Using the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ) multi-informant algorithm to screen looked-after children for psychiatric disorders. Eur Child Adolesc Psychiatry 13(Suppl 2):II25–II31

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Goodman R, Ford T, Simmons H, Gatward R, Meltzer H (2000) Using the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ) to screen for child psychiatric disorders in a community sample. Br J Psychiatry 177:534–539

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Goodman R, Ford T, Simmons H, Gatward R, Meltzer H (2003) Using the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ) to screen for child psychiatric disorders in a community sample. Int Rev Psychiatry 15:166–172

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Goodman R, Meltzer H, Bailey V (2003) The Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire: a pilot study on the validity of the self-report version. Int Rev Psychiatry 15:173–177

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Goodman R, Scott S (1999) Comparing the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire and the Child Behavior Checklist: is small beautiful? J Abnorm Child Psychol 27:17–24

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Hawes DJ, Dadds MR (2004) Australian data and psychometric properties of the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire. Aust N Z J Psychiatry 38:644–651

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Koskelainen M, Sourander A, Vauras M (2001) Self-reported strengths and difficulties in a community sample of Finnish adolescents. Eur Child Adolesc Psychiatry 10:180–185

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Malmberg M, Rydell AM, Smedje H (2003) Validity of the Swedish version of the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ-Swe). Nord J Psychiatry 57:357–363

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Ministry of Education and Research (2004) The Development of Education 2000–2004. National Report of Norway

  17. Muris P, Meesters C, van den BF (2003) The Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ) – further evidence for its reliability and validity in a community sample of Dutch children and adolescents. Eur Child Adolesc Psychiatry 12:1–8

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Nøvik, T (1999) Validity and Use of the Child Behaviour Checklist in Norwegian Children and Adolescents: Table 1: Previous Norwegian epidemiological studies. University in Oslo, Department Group of Psychiatry

  19. Obel C, Heiervang E, Rodriguez A, Heyerdahl S, Smedje H, Sourander A, Guethmundsson OO, Clench-Aas J, Christensen E, Heian F, Mathiesen KS, Magnusson P, Njarethvik U, Koskelainen M, Ronning JA, Stormark KM, Olsen J (2004) The Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire in the Nordic countries. Eur Child Adolesc Psychiatry 13(Suppl 2):II32–II39

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Quinn P, Wigal S (2004) Perceptions of girls and ADHD: results from a national survey. MedGenMed 6:2

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Rødje K, Clench-Aas J, Van-Roy B, Holmboe O, Müller AM (2004) Helseprofil for barn og ungdom i Akershus-Ungdomsrapporten. Lørenskog, Norway

    Google Scholar 

  22. Rødje K, Clench-Aas J, Van-Roy B, Holmboe O, Müller AM (2004) Helseprofil for barn og ungdom i Akershus-Barnerapporten. Lørenskog, Norway

    Google Scholar 

  23. Ronning JA, Handegaard BH, Sourander A, Morch WT (2004) The Strengths and Difficulties Self-Report Questionnaire as a screening instrument in Norwegian community samples. Eur Child Adolesc Psychiatry 13:73–82

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Rothenberger A, Woerner W (2004) Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ) – evaluations and applications. Eur Child Adolesc Psychiatry 13(Suppl 2):II1–II2

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Smedje H, Broman JE, Hetta J, von Knorring AL (1999) Psychometric properties of a Swedish version of the “Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire”. Eur Child Adolesc Psychiatry 8:63–70

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Verhulst FC, Achenbach TM, van der EJ, Erol N, Lambert MC, Leung PW, Silva MA, Zilber N, Zubrick SR (2003) Comparisons of problems reported by youths from seven countries. Am J Psychiatry 160:1479–1485

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Woerner W, Becker A, Friedrich C, Klasen H, Goodman R, Rothenberger A (2002) Normal values and evaluation of the German parents’ version of Strengths and DIfficulties Questionnaire (SDQ): results of a representative field study. Z Kinder Jugendpsychiatr Psychother 30:105–112

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

Research granted by EXTRA funds from the Norwegian Foundation for Health and Rehabilitation and performed in cooperation with the Norwegian Health Services Research Centre.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Betty Van Roy.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Van Roy, B., Grøholt, B., Heyerdahl, S. et al. Self-reported strengths and difficulties in a large Norwegian population 10–19 years. Eur Child Adolesc Psychiatry 15, 189–198 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00787-005-0521-4

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00787-005-0521-4

Keywords

Navigation