Validade Discriminante da Versão Brasileira do SCORE-15: Um Estudo com Amostra Comunitária e Clínica

Marisa Machado Alves dos Santos; Juliana Maciel de Queiroz; Edna Lúcia Tinoco Ponciano; Margarida Vilaça; Ana Paula Relvas; Luciana Sotero

doi:10.36489/saudecoletiva.2025v15i95p15768-15781

Autores/as

Marisa Machado Alves dos Santos Mestre em Psicologia Clínica. Doutoranda na Universidade de Coimbra. Psicóloga clínica no Núcleo Municipal de Saúde Mental de Macaé-RJ. https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1741-108X
Juliana Maciel de Queiroz Doutora em Ciências. Professora Adjunta na Universidade Estadual do Pará. https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1931-933X
Edna Lúcia Tinoco Ponciano Pós-doutorado em Psicologia. Professora Associada na Universidade do Estado do Rio de Janeiro. https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8606-1095
Margarida Vilaça Doutoramento Inter-Universitário em Psicologia Clínica. Investigadora na Universidade do Minho. https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4349-8633
Ana Paula Relvas Agregação. Professora na Universidade de Coimbra. https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9011-2230
Luciana Sotero Doutoramento Inter-Universitário em Psicologia Clínica. Professora Auxiliar na Universidade de Coimbra. https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8393-2775

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.36489/saudecoletiva.2025v15i95p15768-15781

Palabras clave:

Relaciones familiares, Autoinforme, Reproducibilidad de los resultados

Resumen

RESUMEN

Objetivo: Evaluar la validez discriminante de la versión brasileña del Systemic Clinical Outcome and Routine Evaluation – 15 (SCORE-15) y definir puntos de corte en la clasificación del funcionamiento familiar funcional y problemático. Método: La muestra incluye participantes de la región Sureste (muestra comunitaria) y familias con niños con parálisis cerebral de la región Norte (muestra clínica). La validez discriminante se verificó mediante una prueba de comparación de medias, mientras que los puntos de corte se analizaron mediante la curva Receiver Operating Characteristic. Resultados: El SCORE-15 presenta capacidad discriminatoria al comparar las dos muestras, especialmente en las dimensiones de comunicación y dificultades familiares. Los puntos de corte fueron: Dimensión Fortalezas= 1.8; Dimensión comunicación=2,8; y Dificultades=3.0. Conclusión: El instrumento puede ayudar en la evaluación de familias que tienen hijos con diferentes enfermedades pediátricas crónicas, en las que el funcionamiento familiar influye en el tratamiento.

Citas

Stratton P, Lask J, Bland J, Nowotry E, Evans C, Singh R, Janes E, Peppiant A. Detecting therapeutic improvement early in therapy: Validation of the SCORE-15 index of family functioning and change. J. Fam. Ther. 2010;36:3-19. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-6427.12022

Bié D, Narciso I, Crespo C, Roberto M. Family functioning in the Mozambican context: Results of a psychometric study of the SCORE-15 scale. J. Fam. Ther. 2022;00:1-13. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-6427.12417

Paolini D, Schepisi L The Italian version of SCORE-15: Validation and potential use. Fam. Process. 2020;59(4):1789-1800 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/famp.12495

Shine BK, Park YJ, Ahn BW, Bae J, Park JS, Han SH. Validation Study of Korean Translated Systemic Clinical Outcome Routine Evaluation-15 as Self-Report Family Assessment Measure: Focusing on Adolescent in Daegu and North Gyeongsang Province. Korean J. Fam. Med. 2020;41(6):398-403. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4082/kjfm.19.0076

Dessen MA. Estudando a Família em Desenvolvimento: Desafios Conceituais e Teóricos. Psicol., Ciênc. Prof. 2010;30(núm. esp.):202-219. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1590/S1414-98932010000500010

Carter B, McGoldrick M. As mudanças no ciclo de vida Familiar. São Paulo: Artes Médicas; 1995.

Geralis E. Crianças com paralisia cerebral: guia para pais e educadores. Porto Alegre: Artmed; 2007.

Afonso T, Ramos MFH, França IL, Pontes FAR, Silva SSC. Cuidado Parental à Criança com Paralisia Cerebral: uma Revisão Sistemática da Literatura. Rev. Bras. Ed. Esp. 2016;22(3):455-470. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1590/S1413-65382216000300011

Aguiar MPPA, Lira NA, Morais NA. Family Functioning of People with Disabilities: Cluster-Based Analysis. Paidéia. 2022;32:e3228. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1590/1982-4327e3228

Dertly S, Yilmar QSA, Gunay V. Care burden: perceived social support. coping attitudes and life satisfaction of mothers with children with cerebral palsy. Child Care Health Dev. 2024;50:e13297. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/cch.13297

Dias BLS, Rodrigues MCC, Duarte JLMB. Quality of life of families and Siblings of children with Cerebral Palsy treated at a reference neurorehabilitation center in Brazil. J. Pediatr. 2024;100(5):519-526. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jped.2024.03.010

Klalil M, Elweshahy H, Omar T, Ahmed S. Quality of care provided to children with cerebral palsy. Alexandria. Egypt Leste Mediterr Saúde J. 2018;24(6):522-531. DOI: https://doi.org/10.26719/2018.24.6.522

NiyonsengaI J, Uwingeneye L, MusabyemariyaI I, SagahutuI JB, Cavallini F, Caricati L, Mutabaruka J et al. The psychosocial determinants of adherenceto home-based rehabilitation strategies in parents of children with cerebral palsy: A systematic review. PLoS ONE. 2024;19(6):e0305432. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0305432

Santos BA, Milbrath VM, Freitag VL, Gabatz RIB, Vaz JC. Social support network for the family of cerebral palsy bearing children. Rev. Pesqui. 2019;11(5):1300-1306. DOI: https://doi.org/10.9789/2175-5361.2019.v11i5.1300-1306

Colver A, Rapp M, Eisemann N, Ehlinger V, Thyen U, O’Dickinson H, Parkes J, Parkinson K et al. Self-reported quality of life of adolescents with Cerebral Palsy: A cross-sectional and longitudinal analysis. Lancet. 2016;21:705-716. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(14)61229-0

Vilaça M, Silva J, Relvas AP. Systemic Clinical Outcome Routine Evaluation (SCORE-15). In Relvas AP, Major S, coords. Instrumentos de Avaliação Familiar: Funcionamento e Intervenção. Imprensa da Universidade de Coimbra; 2014 DOI: https://doi.org/10.14195/978-989-26-0839-6_1

Stratton P, Bland J, Janes E, Lask J. Developing an indicator of family function and a practicable outcome measure for systemic family and couple therapy: The SCORE. J. Fam. Ther. 2010;32(3):232-258. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6427.2010.00507.x

Zweig MH, Campbell G. Receiver-operating characteristics (ROC) plots: A fundamental evaluating tool in clinical medicine. Clin. Chem. 1993;39:561-577. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/clinchem/39.4.561

The jamovi project. Jamovi. (Version 2.6) [Computer Software]. 2024.

Vilaça M, Sousa B, Stratton P, Relvas AP. The 15-item Systemic Clinical Outcome and Routine Evaluation (SCORE- 15) scale: Portuguese validation studies. Span. J. Psychol. 2015;18(87):1-10. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/sjp.2015.95

O'Hanrahan K, White MD, Carr A, Cahill P, Keenleyside M, Fitzhenry M, Harte E, Hayes J et al. Validation of 28 and 15 items versions of the SCORE: Family assessment questionnaire with adult mental health service users. J. Fam. Ther. 2017;39(1):4-20. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-6427.12107

Fay D, Carr A, O’Reilly K, Cahill P, Dooley B, Guerin S, Stratton P. Irish norms for the SCORE-15 and SCORE-28 from a national telephone survey. J. Fam. Ther. 2013;35(1):24-42. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6427.2011.00575.x