Purpose: This study aims to answer the question: Does the screening of well-being and learning skills using validated screening tools influence social workers’ decisions on whether to provide an intervention? Method: We answer it using logistic regression on data from a Danish intervention study of children in family foster care, Me and My Foster Family, collected via the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ) and the Attentive to Learning Questionnaire (ATT: Learn), which measure children's psychological well-being and their academic skills and learning difficulties, respectively. Results: While screening results revealing greater learning difficulties are directly associated with social workers’ decision to provide an intervention, those revealing greater problems with well-being are inversely related to the outcome. Further, boys consistently have a higher probability of receiving help than girls. Discussion: Explanations for these unexpected findings are discussed, including the higher priority given by social workers to children's learning difficulties over their well-being.
Achenbach, T. M., & Rescorla, L. A. (2001). Manual for the ASEBA School-Age forms & profiles. University of Vermont, Research Center for Children, Youth, & Families.
ArmsE.BickettJ.GrafV. (2008). Gender bias and imbalance: Girls in US special education programmes. Gender and Education, 20(4), 349–359. https://doi.org/10.1080/09540250802190180
BastianP.SchrödterM., et al. (2023). Decision aids, decision supports and managing risk. In TaylorB. J. (Ed.), The Sage handbook of decision making, assessment and risk in social work (pp. 358–366). Sage Publications.
6.
BaviskarS.BergströmM.Danneskiold-SamsøeS.SjöN. M.SørensenK. M.JacobsenC. B. (2023). Developing an intervention to enhance parental monitoring in family foster care. Research on Social Work Practice, 33(6), 666–678. https://doi.org/10.1177/10497315231168324
7.
BergströmP. M.BaviskarS. (2020). A systematic review of some reliability and validity issues regarding the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire focusing on its use in out-of-home care. Journal of Evidence-Based Social Work, 18(1), 1–32. https://doi.org/10.1080/26408066.2020.1788477
8.
BlesesD.KlyvøL.WillemsenM.BoisenL. A. (2022). Hovedresultater fra forskningsprojektet READ i plejefamilier [Key results from the research project READ in foster families]. Trygfondens Børneforskningscenter.
9.
BohlinG.JanolsL. O. (2004). Behavioural problems and psychiatric symptoms in 5–13 year-old Swedish children—A comparison of parent ratings on the FTF (Five to Fifteen) with the ratings on CBCL (Child Behavior Checklist). European Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 13(Suppl. 3), 14–22. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00787-004-3003-1
10.
BrännströmL.VinnerljungB.ForsmanH.AlmquistY. B. (2017). Children placed in out-of-home care as midlife adults: Are they still disadvantaged or have they caught up with their peers?Child Maltreatment, 22(3), 205–214. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077559517701855
11.
BrännströmL.VinnerljungB.HjernA. (2020). Outcomes in adulthood after long-term foster care: A sibling approach. Child Maltreatment, 25(4), 383–392. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077559519898755
12.
BreenR.KarlsonK. B.HolmA. (2018). Interpreting and understanding logits, probits, and other nonlinear probability models. Annual Review of Sociology, 44(1), 39–54. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-soc-073117-041429
13.
CockerC. M. (2019). Social workers views on the use of the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ) with looked after children. Doctoral dissertation, University of Glasgow. https://theses.gla.ac.uk/41016/
14.
CrouchJ. L.MilnerJ. S., et al. (2023). Standardised risk assessment: Methods, development and applications. In TaylorB. J. (Ed.), The Sage handbook of decision making, assessment and risk in social work (pp. 335–344). Sage Publications.
15.
DanielJ.WangH. (2023). Gender differences in special educational needs identification. Review of Education, 11, e3437. https://doi.org/10.1002/rev3.3437
16.
FlukeJ. D.GrahamJ. C. (2023). Introduction to section three [Assessment tools and approaches]. In TaylorB. J.FlukeJ. D.GrahamJ. C.KeddellE.KillickC.ShlonskyA.WhittakerA. (Eds.), The Sage handbook of decision making, assessment and risk in social work (pp. 393–303). SAGE Publications.
17.
ForsmanH. (2020). Exploring educational pathways over the life course in children with out-of-home care experience: A multi-group path analysis. Children and Youth Services Review, 111, 104852. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2020.104852
18.
FrogleyC.JohnM.DentonR.QuerstretD. (2019). ‘They don’t meet the stereotypes in the boxes…’: Foster carers’ and clinicians’ views on the utility of psychometric tools in the mental health assessment of looked after children. Adoption & Fostering, 43(2), 119–136. https://doi.org/10.1177/0308575919841752
19.
GoodmanR. (1997). The strengths and difficulties questionnaire: A research note. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 38(5), 581–586.
20.
GoodmanR.MeltzerH.BaileyV. (1998). The strengths and difficulties questionnaire: A pilot study on the validity of the self-report version. European Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 7(3), 125–130. https://doi.org/10.1007/s007870050057
21.
HallJ. N. (2013). Pragmatism, evidence, and mixed methods evaluation. New Directions for Evaluation, 2013(138), 15–26. https://doi.org/10.1002/ev.20054
22.
HoodR.LansleyS.MitchellT.Gaskell-MewE. (2021). Using outcome measures in child protection work. Child & Family Social Work, 26(3), 318–328. https://doi.org/10.1111/cfs.12811
23.
JacobsenC. B.Danneskiold-SamsøeS. (2024). Kan viden åbne døre? Om nytten af screening som socialfagligt redskab i arbejdet med børn i anbringelser. [Kan knowledge open doors? On the usefulness of screening as a social work tool in work with children in care.]. Specialpædagogik, 3, 41–53.
24.
JacobsenC. B.KoustrupC.SjöN. M. (2023). Observant on learning? Finding a screening tool to support social workers’ monitoring of learning. Nordic Social Work Research, 14(4), 627–640. https://doi.org/10.1080/2156857X.2023.2285991
25.
JacobsenC. B.KoustrupC.SjöN. M. (2024). Attentive to learning? Supporting social workers’ monitoring of learning skills in children placed in foster care. Children and Youth Services Review, 162, 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2024.107690
26.
JacobsenC. B.SjöN. M. (2024). Kunsten at få trænet læring i hjemmet. [The art of getting learning trained in the home]. Pædagogisk Psykologisk Tidsskrift, 61(2), 56–66.
27.
JeeS. H.HaltermanJ. S.SzilagyiM.ConnA. M.Alpert-GillisL.SzilagyiP. G. (2011). Use of a brief standardized screening instrument in a primary care setting to enhance detection of social-emotional problems among youth in foster care. Academic Pediatrics, 11(5), 409–413. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acap.2011.03.001
28.
KääriäläA.BerlinM.LaustenM.HiilamoH.RistikariT. (2018). Early school leaving by children in out-of-home care: A comparative study of three Nordic countries. Children and Youth Services Review, 93, 186–195. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2018.06.007
29.
KerstenP.CzubaK.McPhersonK.DudleyM.ElderH.TauroaR.VandalA. (2016). A systematic review of evidence for the psychometric properties of the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 40(1), 64–75. https://doi.org/10.1177/0165025415570647
30.
Kovacs, M. (1992). Children's depression inventory manual. Multi-Health Systems Inc.
31.
KvandeM. N.BelskyJ.WichstrømL. (2017). Selection for special education services: The role of gender and socio-economic status. European Journal of Special Needs Education, 33(4), 510–524. https://doi.org/10.1080/08856257.2017.1373493
32.
LambekR.TrillingsgaardA. (2015). Elaboration, validation and standardization of the five to fifteen (FTF) questionnaire in a Danish population sample. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 38, 161–170. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.RIDD.2014.12.018
MoodC. (2010). Logistic regression: Why we cannot do what we think we can do, and what we can do about it. European Sociological Review, 26(1), 67–82. https://doi.org/10.1093/esr/jcp006
NiclasenJ.SkovgaardA. M.AndersenA.-M. N.SømhovdM. J.ObelC. (2013). A confirmatory approach to examining the factor structure of the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ): A large scale cohort study. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 41(3), 355–365. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10802-012-9683-y
40.
NiclasenJ.TeasdaleT. W.AndersenA.-M. N.SkovgaardA. M.ElberlingH.ObelC. (2012). Psychometric properties of the Danish Strength and Difficulties Questionnaire: The SDQ assessed for more than 70,000 raters in four different cohorts. PLoS One, 7(2), e32025. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0032025
41.
ObelC.ArnfredJ.SvendsenK.BreinholmN.LangkildeL.PoulsenS.H. (2016). Måling af mental sundhed med spørgeskemaet SDQ: Anvendelse af SDQ i Skolesundhed.dk. [The measurement of mental health with the SDQ questionnaire: Use of the SDQ in Skolesundhed.dk]. Center for Sundhedssamarbejde, Health, Aarhus Universitet.
42.
O'NeillE. (2018). Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire's strengths and limitations as a practice and evaluation tool in social work. Aotearoa New Zealand Social Work, 30(2), 28–41. https://doi.org/10.11157/anzswj-vol30iss2id403
43.
PepinskyT. B. (2018). A note on listwise deletion versus multiple imputation. Political Analysis, 26(4), 480–488. https://doi.org/10.1017/pan.2018.18
PetrenkoC. L.CulhaneS. E.GarridoE. F.TaussigH. N. (2011). Do youth in out-of-home care receive recommended mental health and educational services following screening evaluations?Children and Youth Services Review, 33(10), 1911–1918. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2011.05.015
46.
Rambøll Management. (2021). Juridiske rammer og opmærksomhedspunkter i samarbejdet om anbragte børn og unges skolegang. [Legal frameworks and points of attention in the collaboration on the schooling of children and young people placed in out-of-home care.] Social- og Boligstyrelsen.
47.
SjöN. M. (2016). Measuring socio-emotional and pre-math skills in early childhood. Doctoral dissertation, Aarhus University.
48.
Sjö, N. M., Kragh, C. L., & Jacobsen, C. B.. (2023). Når plejeforældre er isbrydere for bornenes lyst til læring [When foster parents are icebreakers for the children's desire to learn]. Pædagogisk Psykologisk Tidsskrift, 60(1), 88–98.
49.
SørensenK. M., et al. (2023). Implementing assessments using structured tools. In TaylorB. J. (Ed.), The Sage handbook of decision making, assessment and risk in social work (pp. 347–357). Sage Publications.
50.
SørensenK. M.SjoeN. M. (2021). Feasible interventions for children in foster care according to service users and practitioners. Child & Family Social Work, 26(3), 379–393. https://doi.org/10.1111/cfs.12820
51.
StataCorp. (2025). Stata Statistical Software: Release 18. StataCorp LLC.
52.
ThygesenS.BaviskarS.BergströmP. M.Dencker-LarsenS. (2025). Home-based low-intensity learning interventions for 11-17-year-old children and adolescents in foster care: A scoping review [Manuscript submitted for publication]. Institute of Social Work, University College Copenhagen.
53.
TrillingsgaardA.DammD.SommerS., et al. (2004). Developmental profiles on the basis of the FTF (five to fifteen) questionnaire. European Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 13(Suppl 3), iii39–iii49. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00787-004-3006-y
54.
TurneyD.RuchG., et al. (2023). The contribution of reflective practice to developing professional judgement and decision-making knowledge and skills. In TaylorB. J. (Ed.), The Sage handbook of decision making, assessment and risk in social work (pp. 482–492). Sage Publications.
WangJ. S.AronowP. M. (2023). Listwise deletion in high dimensions. Political Analysis, 31(1), 149–155. https://doi.org/10.1017/pan.2022.5
57.
WhiteJ.ConnellyG.ThompsonL.WilsonP. (2013). Assessing wellbeing at school entry using the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire: Professional perspectives. Educational Research, 55(1), 87–98. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131881.2013.767027
58.
WilliamsR. (2012). Using the margins command to estimate and interpret adjusted predictions and marginal effects. The Stata Journal, 12(2), 308–331. https://doi.org/10.1177/1536867X1201200209
