{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.0460788657509969, 'fraction_numerical': 0.02259636685866194, 'mean_word_length': 4.716455696202532, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 1, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
The Behavior Problems Inventory-Short Form for individuals with intellectual disabilities: part I: development and provisional clinical reference data.

BACKGROUND
The Behavior Problems Inventory-01 (BPI-01) is an informant-based behaviour rating instrument that was designed to assess maladaptive behaviours in individuals with intellectual disabilities (ID). Its items fall into one of three sub-scales: Self-injurious Behavior (14 items), Stereotyped Behavior (24 items), and Aggressive/Destructive Behavior (11 items). Each item is rated on a frequency scale (0 = never to 4 = hourly), and a severity scale (0 = no problem to 3 = severe problem). The BPI-01 has been successfully used in several studies and has shown acceptable to very good psychometric properties. One concern raised by some investigators was the large number of items on the BPI-01, which has reduced its user friendliness for certain applications. Furthermore, researchers and clinicians were often uncertain how to interpret their BPI-01 data without norms or a frame of reference.


METHODS
The Behavior Problems Inventory-Short Form (BPI-S) was empirically developed, based on an aggregated archival data set of BPI-01 data from individuals with ID from nine locations in the USA, Wales, England, the Netherlands, and Romania (n = 1122). The BPI-S uses the same rating system and the same three sub-scales as the BPI-01, but has fewer items: Self-injurious Behavior (8 items), Stereotyped Behavior (12 items), and Aggressive/Destructive Behavior (10 items). Rating anchors for the severity scales of the Self-injurious Behavior and the Aggressive/Destructive Behavior sub-scales were added in an effort to enhance the objectivity of the ratings.


RESULTS
The sensitivity of the BPI-S compared with the BPI-01 was high (0.92 to 0.99), and so were the correlations between the analogous BPI-01 and the BPI-S sub-scales (0.96 to 0.99). Means and standard deviations were generated for both BPI versions in a Sex-by-age matrix, and in a Sex-by-ID Level matrix. Combined sex ranges are also provided by age and level of ID.


CONCLUSION
In summary, the BPI-S is a very useful alternative to the BPI-01, especially for research and evaluation purposes involving groups of individuals.