| Title |
Comparisons of the Factor Structure and Measurement Invariance of the Spence Children’s Anxiety Scale—Parent Version in Children with Autism Spectrum Disorder and Typically Developing Anxious Children
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, April 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10803-017-3118-0 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Magdalena Glod, Cathy Creswell, Polly Waite, Ruth Jamieson, Helen McConachie, Mikle Don South, Jacqui Rodgers |
| Abstract |
The Spence Children's Anxiety Scale-Parent version (SCAS-P) is often used to assess anxiety in children with autism spectrum disorder (ASD), however, little is known about the validity of the tool in this population. The aim of this study was to determine whether the SCAS-P has the same factorial validity in a sample of young people with ASD (n = 285), compared to a sample of typically developing young people with anxiety disorders (n = 224). Poor model fit with all of the six hypothesised models precluded invariance testing. Exploratory factor analysis indicated that different anxiety phenomenology characterises the two samples. The findings suggest that cross-group comparisons between ASD and anxious samples based on the SCAS-P scores may not always be appropriate. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 42 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 23 | 55% |
| United States | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 18 | 43% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 30 | 71% |
| Scientists | 9 | 21% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 5% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 2% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 102 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 102 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 16 | 16% |
| Student > Master | 14 | 14% |
| Student > Bachelor | 11 | 11% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 10 | 10% |
| Researcher | 10 | 10% |
| Other | 13 | 13% |
| Unknown | 28 | 27% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 50 | 49% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 6 | 6% |
| Social Sciences | 5 | 5% |
| Arts and Humanities | 2 | 2% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 2% |
| Other | 3 | 3% |
| Unknown | 34 | 33% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 27. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 11 January 2018.
All research outputs
#1,401,626
of 25,199,243 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders
#532
of 5,431 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#27,429
of 316,289 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders
#13
of 105 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,199,243 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,431 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.2. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 316,289 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 105 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.