A total of 3329 children and families visited the study outpatient clinics during sample accrual (11/14/2005–11/28/2008). Of these, 79% (n=2622) were eligible and agreed to participate.. Two-thirds of the sample were male (66%, n=1730) and White (67%, n=1743), with a mean age of 9.4 years (SD=2.0, range 6.0–12.9). Forty-one percent (n=1074) of the visits were paid for by Medicaid and 53% (n=1395) by private insurance (). IRB regulations allowed limited information (child age and insurance status) to be collected on non-participants. Non-participating children were slightly younger (M=9.1 years, SD=2.0) in comparison to participating children (M=9.4 years, SD=2.0; t=4.42, df=3327, p<0.001) but payment for visits by Medicaid was similar (41.4% versus 41.0%, respectively; X2=0.05, df=1, p=0.82.) These results were consistent across sites with one exception, participating children in Pittsburgh were more likely to have visits paid for by Medicaid compared to non-participating children (54.3% versus 34.6%, respectively; X2=27.29, df=1, p<.0001).
Sociodemographic Characteristics of the Study Population According to Screening Status.
Adults completed the PGBI-10M on the 2622 participating children; 43% had PGBI-10M scores of 12 or higher (i.e., a positive screen) When compared to negatively screened children, children with positive screens were more likely to be Latino (4.0% versus 2.5%, respectively; X2=4.43, df=1, p=0.04, d=0.09), younger (M=9.3 years, SD=2.0 versus M=9.6 years, SD=1.9: t=3.8, df=2620, p<.001, d=0.15) and supported by Medicaid (48.4% versus 35.4%, respectively, X2=45.00, df=1, p=<0.001, d=0.28). There were no significant differences between screen positives and screen negatives in terms of sex or race. Similarities and differences were largely consistent across sites with a few exceptions. Whites were less likely to be screen positives at the Pittsburgh, PA and Cleveland, OH sites and males were more likely to be screen positives in the Columbus, OH sites (data not shown).
Children with positive screens whose families did (55.2%, n= 621) and did not agree (44.8%, n=503) to participate in phase-two of the study were examined. As shown in , no significant demographic differences emerged between groups in terms of child age, sex, race/ethnicity or insurance status. These findings were consistent across sites with one exception. In Pittsburgh, Whites were more likely to refuse participation in phase-two. These comparisons were not done for the screen negatives because they were sampled with replacements if they did not agree to participate in the longitudinal phase of the study.
Sociodemographic Characteristics of the Screen Positive Participants by Enrollment into the Longitudinal Study.
Positive versus Negative Screens
Finally, we examined symptoms endorsed on the PGBI-10M for those screening positive compared to those screening negative (). As would be expected, all 10 items on the PGBI-10M were more frequently endorsed by those who screened positive. Among the positives, 4 items were endorsed most frequently: mood/energy shifted rapidly from happy to sad or high to low; days unusually happy & intensely energetic, yet also physically restless; shifting activities; and feelings/energy are generally up or down, but rarely in the middle. However, the items with the largest effect sizes, that is those that best discriminated between the positives and negatives, were items 1, 2, 6, and 9. Appendix A
contains the full distribution of responses for ESM+
Symptoms endorsed on the Parent General Behavior Inventory-10 Item Mania Scale (PGBI-10M)