Massachusetts Youth Screening Instrument-2 (MAYSI-2)

Submitted by mholliday on Mon, 12/09/2013 - 15:43

Overview

Acronym: 
MAYSI-2
Author(s): 
Grisso, T., Ph.D., and Barnum, R., M.D.
Citation: 

Grisso, T., & Barnum, R. (2000). Massachusetts Youth Screening Instrument-2 (MAYSI-2): User's manual and technical report. Worchester, MA: University of Massachusetts Medical School.

Obtain(Email/Website): 

The measure, manuals, and training can be requested at the following website: http://nysap.us/NYSAPTARequestForm.html

Additional questions can be directed to National Youth Screening and Assessment Project, nysap@umassmed.edu, University of Massachusets Medical School, Psychiatry Department, 55 Lake Avenue North, Worcester, MA 01655.

Cost: 
Cost Involved
Copyrighted: 
Yes
Measure Description: 

NOTE: The user manual and technical report cost $125, MAYSIWARE (for electronic administration) costs $279.95.

The MAYSI-2 is a 15-minutes self-report screening tool designed specifically for use in juvenile detention centers. The measure was designed to be administered by detention center staff with minimal training within 2 days of a youth's admission to the facility. There are 5 subscales that have been validated for both boys and girls: Alcohol/Drug Use, Anger-Irritability, Depression-Anxiety, Somatic Complaints, and Suicide Ideation, and a sixth scale, Thought Disturbance, validated only for boys. A seventh scale, Traumatic Experiences, measures lifetime trauma exposure and posttraumatic reactions and contains slightly different items for girls and boys.

Domain(s) Assessed : 
Trauma Exposure/Reminders
Anxiety/Mood (Internalizing Symptoms)
Externalizing Symptoms
Health
Language(s) : 
Arabic
Dutch
Flemish
French
German
Greek
Italian
Korean
Norwegian
Portuguese
Russian
Spanish
Swedish
Turkish
Vietnamese
Age Range: 
12-17
Measure Type: 
Screening
# of Items: 
52
Measure Format: 
Questionnaire
Average Time to Complete (min): 
15
Reporter Type: 
Self
Average Time to Score (min): 
Range: Immediate/Automatic (computerized format), less than 15 minutes (paper/pencil)
Periodicity: 
Each time a youth is admitted into a juvenile detention facility
Response Format: 

Yes/No

Materials Needed: 
Paper/Pencil
Computer
Other Materials Needed: 
Note that the measure can be administered in either paper and pencil format or computer-based format. Computerized format is the most common in the United States.
Sample Item(s): 
Scales
Sample Items
Alcohol/Drug Use (8 items)Have you used alcohol or drugs to help you feel better?
Angry-Irritable (9 items)Have you lost your temper easily, or had a "short fuse"?
Depressesd-Anxious (9 items)Have nervous or worried feelings kept you from doing things you want to do?
Somatic Complaints (6 items)Have you had bad headaches?
Suicide Ideation (5 items)Have you felt like killing yourself?
Thought Disturbance (boys only, 5 items)Have you seen things that other people say are not really there?
Traumatic Experiences (differs by gender, 5 items)Have you ever seen someone severely injured or killed (in person- not in movies or on TV)?
Information Provided: 
Areas of Concern/Risks

Training

Administration Training: 
Manual/Video
Training to Interpret: 
Manual/Video

Parallel/Alternate Forms

Parallel Form: 
No
Alternate Form: 
No
Different Age Forms: 
No
Altered Version Forms: 
No

Psychometrics

Notes on Psychometric Norms: 

The measure was normed on a national sample of youth detained in juvenile justice facilities in 19 states.

Clinical Cutoffs: 
Yes
If Yes, Specify Cutoffs: 
The measure provides cutoffs for "Caution" (indicating "possible clinical significance") and "Warning" (indicating that "the youth has scored exceptionally high in comparison to other youths in the juvenile justice system). The caution cutoff scores are 4 (Alcohol/Drug use), 5 (Angry/Irritable), 3 (Depressed-Anxious), 3 (Somatic Complaints), 2 (Suicidal Ideation), and 1 (Thought Disturbance, boys only). The warning cutoffs are 7 (Alcohol/Drug use), 8 (Angry-Irritable), 6 (Depressed-Anxious), 6 (Somatic Complaints), 3 (Suicide Ideation), 2 (Thought Disturbance, boys only). NOTE: No cut-off scores have been established for the Traumatic Experiences scale, although information regarding the sensitivity and specificity of possible cut-off scores is presented in Kerig et al. (2011).
Reliability: 
Type:RatingStatisticsMinMaxAvg
Test-Retest (boys)Intraclass Correlation Coefficient0.530.890.74
Test-Retest (girls)Intraclass Correlation Coefficient0.660.850.74
Internal ConsistencyAlpha0.55 (Thought Disturbance, boys only)0.87 (Somatic Complaints)0.77
Parallel/Alternate Forms
Number of Test-retest Days: 
6-12 (boys, M=8.3; girls, M=5.6)
References for Reliability: 

NOTE: The MAYSI-2 is intended to assess the youth's current functioning at the time of intake into a facility, and is thus not expected to demonstrate reliability across periods of time.

Per the MAYSI-2 manual, girls' scores were not significantly different across administrations. For boys, lower scores on Depressed-Anxious, Somatic Complaints, and Thought Disturbance were seen on the second administration. The authors suggest that this difference may be due to a practice effect or to adjustment over time to the detention center environment, and that it is consistent with other measures of youth psychopathology.

Archer et al. (2004) retested youth an average of 15 days later and reported correlations between .60 and .82.

Cauffman (2004) retested youth after an interval of an average of 111 days and reported reliability correlations ranging from .27 and .70.

NOTE: For the Traumatic Experiences scale specifically, alphas range from .60 to .81 with an average .71. See Cauffman and MacIntosh (2006) for an examination of internal consistency and factor structure by race and ethnicity and Ford et al. (2008) for an examination of gender differences.

Content Validity Evaluated: 
Yes
References for Content Validity: 

Per the MAYSI-2 manual, the subscales of Depressed-Anxious are correlated significantly with Angry-Irritable (r=.61 for girls, .57 for boys), consistent with clinical observations and empirical evidence, and Depressed-Anxious also correlates significantly with Suicide Ideation (r=.53 for girls, .54 for boys), as would be expected.

Construct Validity Evaluated: 
Yes
Construct Validity: 
Validity TypeNot knownNot foundNonclincal Samples*Clinical SamplesDiverse Samples
Convergent/Concurrentxx
Discriminantxx
Sensitive to Changex
Intervention Effectsx
Longitudinal/Maturation Effectsx
Sensitive to Theoretically Distinct Groupsxx
Factorial Validityxx
References for Construct Validity: 

* = This measure was designed for youth in juvenile justice settings. Although not a clinical population per se, this is also a group that is distinct from the normative population, in particular because of their high rates of mental health problems, trauma exposure, and posttraumatic stress symptoms.

Criterion Validity Evaluated: 
Yes
Criterion Validity: 
Not KnownNot FoundNonclinical SamplesClinical SamplesDiverse SamplesNot applicable
Predictive Validity:x
Postdictive Validity: x
References for Criterion Validity: 

NOTE: The MAYSI-2 was intended to be given at a single point in time in order to assess current functioning, and therefore predictive validity is not relevant.

Concurrent Validity: Per the MAYSI-2 manual, scores were compared to concurrent similar subscale scores on the MACI and CBCL-YSR. Grisso et al. (2012) reviewed research on concurrent validity and identified that for the Alcohol/Drug use subscale, correlations with the MACI ranged from .66 (Butler et al., 2007) to .82 (Grisso et al., 2001). The Anger-Irritability subscale correlated with similar subscales on the YSR and MACI, ranging from .48 (Grisso et al., 2001) to .70 (Caldwell et al., 2006). The Somatic Complaints subscale correlated with a similar subscale on the YSR between .40 and .51 (Grisso et al., 2001). The Suicide Ideation subscale correlated highly with several other measures including the Suicide Ideation Questionnaire and a subscale of the MACI (see Grisso et al., 2012, for a review). Archer et al. (2004) analyzed a diverse sample of JJS-involved youth (using archival data). The authors found higher Suicide Ideation scores for adolescents who reported suicidal ideation or history of suicide attempts; similar for substance abuse and the Alcohol/Drug scale, and physical and sexual abuse histories for the Traumatic Experiences scale. Cruise et al. (2008) found that all scales but Somatic Complaints were correlated with similar scales from the MACI and YSR.

Sensitivity: In an assessment of the Traumatic Experiences scale specifically, the UCLA Posttraumatic Stress Disorder Reaction Index for DSM-IV, Adolescent Version (PTSD-RI), was used as the gold standard comparison in a recent study (Kerig, Moeddel, & Becker 2011), which found that the TE scale was modestly sensitive in screening youth who meet the criteria for PTSD. Additional information regarding sensitivity of the other scales is available in the MAYSI-2 manual.

Specificity: The UCLA Posttramatic Stress Disorder Reaction Index for DSM-IV, Adolscent Version (PTSD-RI), was used as the gold standard comparison in a recent study (Kerig, Moeddel, and Becker 2011), which found that the TE scale in particular was modestly specific in screening youth who meet the criteria for PTSD. Additional information regarding specificity for the other scales is available in the MAYSI-2 manual.
 

Overall Psychometric Limitations: 

The Thought Disturbance scale has validity established only for boys. Other than the Kerig et al. (2011) study, the Traumatic Experiences scale has not been validated.

Translation Quality

Language(s) Other Than English: 
Language:TranslatedBack TranslatedReliableGood Psychometric PropertiesFactor StructureNorms AvailableMeasure Developed for this Group
1. Arabicxx
2. Dutch (Netherlands)xxx (in progress)x (in progress)
3. Flemishxx
4. French (Canada, France, Switzerland) xxx (Swiss version norming in process)
5. German xx
6. Greekxx
7. Italianxx
8. Koreanxx
9. Norwegianxx
10. Portuguesexx
11. Russianxx
12. Spanish (Spain, Catalan, U.S.) xx
13. Swedishxx
14. Turkishxx
15. Vietnamesexx

Population Information

Population Used For Measure Development: 

This measure was developed for use with youth detained in juvenile justice settings.

Measure has demonstrated evidence of reliability and validity in which populations?: 
Physical Abuse
Sexual Abuse
Medical Trauma
Witness Death
Natural Disaster
Domestic Violence
Community Violence
Traumatic Loss (Death)
Kidnapping/Hostage
War/Combat
Neglect
Accidents
Assault
Imprisonment
Immigration Related Trauma
Terrorism
Other
Other populations: 
These are polyvictimized youth who may have experiences any or all of the above.

Pros & Cons/References

Pros: 

1. Brief

2. Can be administered by detention center staff without much special training

3. Yes/no answer format is easy for youth

4. Reading level is accessible for youth

5. Warning and caution cutoffs are easy to interpret

Cons: 

1. Traumatic Experiences scale has not been validated and does not have cut-off scores established

2. Research to date indicates only modest sensitivity and specificity for the Traumatic Experiences scale in screening youth who meet criteria for PTSD

3. Thought Disturbance scale not valid for use with girls

References: 

Archer, R.P., Stredny, R.V., Mason, J.A., & Arnau, R.C. (2004). An examination and replication of the psychometric properties of the Massachusetts Youth Screening Instrument-Second Edition (MAYSI-2) among adolescents in detention settings. Assessment, 11, 290-302.

Butler, M., Loney, B., & Kistner, J. (2007). The Massachusetts Youth Screening Instrument as a predictor of institutional maladjustment in severe male juvenile offenders. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 34, 476-492.

Caldwell, R., Sturges, S., & Silver, N. (2006). Home versus school environments and their influences on the affective and behavioral states of African American, Hispanic, and Caucasian juvenile offenders. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 16, 125-138.

Cauffman, E. (2004). A statewide screening of mental health symptoms among juvenile offenders in detention. Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 43, 430-439.

Cauffman, E., & MacIntosh, R. (2006). A Rasch differential item functioning analysis of the Massachusetts Youth Screening Instrument. Educational and Psychological Management, 66i, 502-521.

Cruise, K. R., Dandreaux, D. M., Marsee, M. A., & DePrato, D. K. (2008). Identification of critical items on the Massachusetts Youth Screening Instrument-2 (MAYSI-2) in incarcerated youth. International Journal of Forensic Mental Health, 7, 121-132.

Ford, J., Chapman, J. F., Pearson, G., Borum, R., & Wolpaw, J. M. (2008). Psychometric status and clinical utility of the MAYSI-2 with girls and boys in juvenile detention. Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment, 30, 87-99.

Grisso, T., & Barnum, R. (2006). Massachusetts youth screening instrument version 2: User’s
manual and technical report. Sarasota, FL: Professional Resource Press.

Grisso, T., Barnum, R., Fletcher, K. E., Cauffman, E., & Peuschold, D. (2001). Massachusetts Youth Screening Instrument for Mental Health Needs of Juvenile Justice Youths. Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 40, 541-548.

Grisso, T., Fusco, S., Paiva-Salisbury, M., Perrauot, R., Williams, V., & Barnum, R. (2012). The Massachusetts Youth Screening Instrument-Version 2 (MAYSI-2): Comprehensive Research Review. Worcester, MA: University of Massachusetts Medical School.

Kerig, P. K., Moeddel, M. A., & Becker, S. P. (2011). Assessing the sensitivity and specificity of
the MAYSI-2 for detecting trauma among youth in juvenile detention. Child Youth Care Forum, 40, 345-362.
 

Developer of Review: 
Diana C. Bennett, Crosby A. Modrowski, Patricia K. Kerig
Editor of Review: 
Diana C. Bennett, Crosby A. Modrowski, Patricia K. Kerig
Last Updated: 
Wed, 12/11/2013
0