Previous research on the association between socioeconomic status (SES) and child and adolescent antisocial behaviour has produced mixed findings showing variation in the strength of association. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to summarise evidence on the relationship between socioeconomic status and broadly conceptualised antisocial behaviour, investigating variation across a range of antisocial subtypes and other potential moderators, including age, sex and informant. We identified 133 studies containing data suitable for effect size calculation, and 139 independent effect sizes were analysed (total N=339868). The global meta-analysis showed that lower family socioeconomic status was associated with higher levels of antisocial behaviour. Moderation analyses revealed this relationship was stronger where callous-unemotional traits were the outcome, and where antisocial behaviour was reported by parents or teachers rather than self-reported. The relationship between family SES and antisocial behaviour, however, was independent of higher-level constructs such as national income inequality. These results indicate that SES can be considered a robust correlate of broadly conceptualised antisocial behaviour but the strength of this relationship may depend on the antisocial subtype under investigation and the design of the study.

BACKGROUND: The Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ) is widely used to screen for child mental health problems and measure common forms of psychopathology in 4-to 16-year-olds. Using longitudinal data, we examined the validity of a version adapted for 3-to 4-year-olds. METHODS:We used SDQ data from 16 659 families collected by the Millennium Cohort Study, which charts the development of children born throughout the United Kingdom during [2000][2001]. Parents completed the preschool SDQ when children were aged 3 and the standard SDQ at ages 5 and 7. The SDQ's internal factor structure was assessed by using confirmatory factor analysis, with a series of competing models and extensions used to determine construct, convergent, and discriminant validity and measurement invariance over time. Predictive validity was evaluated by examining the relationships of age 3 SDQ scores with age 5 diagnostic measures of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder, autism spectrum disorder/Asperger syndrome, and teacher-reported measures of personal, social, and emotional development. RESULTS:Confirmatory factor analysis supported a 5-factor measurement model. Internal reliability of subscales ranged from v = 0.66 (peer problems) to v = 0.83 (hyperactivity). Itemfactor structures revealed measurement invariance over time. Strong positive correlations between ages 3 and 5 SDQ scores were not significantly different from correlations between age 5 and 7 scores. Conduct problems and hyperactivity subscales independently predicted developmental and clinical outcomes 2 years later.CONCLUSIONS: Satisfactory psychometric properties of the adapted preschool version affirm its utility as a screening tool to identify 3-to 4-year-olds with emotional and behavioral difficulties. WHAT'S KNOWN ON THIS SUBJECT:Although the psychometric properties of the school-age Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ) have been extensively examined by using longitudinal data, the preschool version of the SDQ has only been explored in a limited number of cross-sectional studies. WHAT THIS STUDY ADDS:This is the first psychometric study of the preschool SDQ using longitudinal data. We report measurement invariance over time, satisfactory reliability, construct and criterion validity, and predictive utility for subsequent behavioral problems (4 years) and clinical disorders (2 years). Ms Croft contributed to the choice of analysis, carried out the analyses, and drafted the manuscript; Dr Stride conceptualized and designed the analyses and reviewed and revised the manuscript; Dr Maughan conceptualized the study and critically reviewed the manuscript; Dr Rowe coordinated the research team, contributed to the choice of analysis, and reviewed and revised the manuscript; and all authors approved the final manuscript as submitted.www.pediatrics.org/cgi

No abstract