Interpretability and clinical utility of the strength and stressors in parenting questionnaire

This study aimed to enhance the interpretability and clinical utility of the strength and stressors in parenting (SSF) questionnaire, a parent-reported questionnaire designed to assess strength, stress and associated risks of mental ill-health in parents of children with developmental disabilities. Responses to the SSF and a demographic questionnaire were collected from 576 parents of children with (n = 203) and without (n = 373) developmental disabilities. To enhance the interpretability of the SSF, a subset of 129 parents were invited to complete an additional questionnaire consisting of three free-text questions regarding recent help-seeking behavior, experiences of mental ill-health and experiences of parenthood. Parents' responses to the free-text questions were then categorized as indicative of higher or lower degrees of stress and compared to their SSF score distribution to derive empirical cut-offs for strength, stress and risk of mental ill-health as measured by the SSF. The credibility of these cut-offs was evaluated by comparing the cut-offs with SSF scores collected from the other 447 parents. Finally, SSF scores from parents of children without developmental disabilities (n = 373) were used to generate percentile values for the SSF to enable a standardized interpretation of SSF scores. To increase the utility of the SSF, we examined a recurring pattern of missing answers to items 23 and 33-38, noted in previous studies of the SSF and repeated in the present study. These items were excluded from further analysis since our examination revealed that they were not missing at random but rather constituted real differences in parental experiences, such as receiving a healthcare allowance, or caring for more than one child. The proposed empirical cut-offs performed well in discriminating between the two groups and yielded a specificity of 77-89% and a sensitivity of 68-76% for the strength, stress and risk of mental ill-health subscales of the SSF. This study also presents a conversion chart associating each SSF score with a corresponding percentile value. We propose modifications to the SSF, whereby items 23 and 33-38 are excluded, which will enable a more reliable assessment of parental experiences. This will, together with the empirical cut-offs and percentile values, enhance the interpretability and clinical utility of the SSF.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Scandinavian Journal of Psychology
Published
2024-09-16
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1111/sjop.13073
Primary Topic
Family and Disability Support Research
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Interpretability and clinical utility of the strength and stressors in parenting questionnaire

Sara E. Burge, Carmela Miniscalco, Sofia Strömbergsson, Anders Sand et al.
Scandinavian Journal of Psychology
Family and Disability Support Research
article

Interpretability and clinical utility of the strength and stressors in parenting questionnaire

Sara E. Burge, Carmela Miniscalco, Sofia Strömbergsson, Anders Sand, Anna Eva Hallin
article en

Abstract

This study aimed to enhance the interpretability and clinical utility of the strength and stressors in parenting (SSF) questionnaire, a parent-reported questionnaire designed to assess strength, stress and associated risks of mental ill-health in parents of children with developmental disabilities. Responses to the SSF and a demographic questionnaire were collected from 576 parents of children with (n = 203) and without (n = 373) developmental disabilities. To enhance the interpretability of the SSF, a subset of 129 parents were invited to complete an additional questionnaire consisting of three free-text questions regarding recent help-seeking behavior, experiences of mental ill-health and experiences of parenthood. Parents' responses to the free-text questions were then categorized as indicative of higher or lower degrees of stress and compared to their SSF score distribution to derive empirical cut-offs for strength, stress and risk of mental ill-health as measured by the SSF. The credibility of these cut-offs was evaluated by comparing the cut-offs with SSF scores collected from the other 447 parents. Finally, SSF scores from parents of children without developmental disabilities (n = 373) were used to generate percentile values for the SSF to enable a standardized interpretation of SSF scores. To increase the utility of the SSF, we examined a recurring pattern of missing answers to items 23 and 33-38, noted in previous studies of the SSF and repeated in the present study. These items were excluded from further analysis since our examination revealed that they were not missing at random but rather constituted real differences in parental experiences, such as receiving a healthcare allowance, or caring for more than one child. The proposed empirical cut-offs performed well in discriminating between the two groups and yielded a specificity of 77-89% and a sensitivity of 68-76% for the strength, stress and risk of mental ill-health subscales of the SSF. This study also presents a conversion chart associating each SSF score with a corresponding percentile value. We propose modifications to the SSF, whereby items 23 and 33-38 are excluded, which will enable a more reliable assessment of parental experiences. This will, together with the empirical cut-offs and percentile values, enhance the interpretability and clinical utility of the SSF.

Scandinavian Journal of PsychologyVol. 66(1)
Sahlgrenska University Hospital (SE), Danderyds sjukhus (SE), Karolinska Institutet (SE), University of Gothenburg (SE)
Reduced inequalities
Openalex Percentile: Top 78%
Family and Disability Support Research
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.