Short measures of youth psychopathology: psychometric properties of the brief problem monitor (BPM) and the behavior and feelings survey (BFS) in a Norwegian clinical sample

Abstract

Background Tracking clinical outcomes during therapy can be useful for improving both clinical practice and research. For repeated data collection, short, reliable, and valid measures of central aspects of psychopathology are necessary. The current paper investigates the psychometric properties of two short surveys for measuring central dimensions of psychopathology in youth. Methods We investigated the factor structure and validity of the Norwegian translations of the Behavior and Feelings Survey (BFS) and the Brief Problem Monitor (BPM). The BFS has previously shown a two-factor structure and indications of validity as a measure of internalizing and externalizing problems in youth. The BPM has support for a three-factor structure of internalizing, externalizing, and attention problems. In our sample of 503 patients (56% female, age 6 to 18) in a Norwegian outpatient clinic, we conducted confirmatory factor analyses to test the assumed measurement models and further considered the concurrent validity of the measures. Results Internal reliability of both measures were good. The results suggest that the assumed measurement models for both questionnaires only partly fit our data but that subscales of the BFS and BPM still indicate convergent validity. Scores on subscales (internalizing and externalizing problems) on both measures converged with relevant subscales as well as with relevant groups of diagnoses. Conclusions Alternative measurement models, and the usefulness and limitations of these short-form questionnaires for internalizing and externalizing problems, are discussed.

Anxiety Symptom Trajectories Predict Depression Symptom Trajectories up to Four Years After CBT for Youth Anxiety Disorders

“…In the current study, we considered multiple potential predictors when examining the long-term depression outcomes after CBT for youth anxiety disorders that were informed by the conceptual framework outlined above. In terms of background factors, we included youth age and gender because females and older youth tend to show more internalizing symptoms than males and younger youth (Rognstad et al, 2022;Solmi et al, 2023). We also included family social class because poor socio-economic status is a risk factor for mental health problems (Bøe et al, 2021).…”