There are no peer-reviewed publications of CANS validity.
Authors, owners and developers of the Child and Adolescent Needs and Strengths tool (CANS) are required by laws and ethics to cite competing evidence.
Since they have done neither, this website will provide the evidence.
Poor Validity
Did you know there are no peer-reviewed studies on the validity of CANS?
Lyons wrote: “The CANS purports to measure both the youth’s risk and protective factors, but its validity is largely un-researched.” (Dilley, Weiner, Lyons & Martinovich, 2007)
In 2008 Lyons wrote “future research should establish the … construct validity of the CANS scales used here through exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis” (Sieracki, Leon, Miller, & Lyons, 2008, p. 806).
However, in 2007, this analysis had already been done with disappointing results that have been buried. Dig them up here.
Untested Reliability
Take Lyons’ word that inter-rater reliability is required before you use any CANS item.
“This form of reliability [inter-rater] is an absolute requirement” (Lyons, 2009, p. 71)
“interrater reliability, even at the individual item level is required” (Anderson, Lyons, Giles, Price & Estle, 2003, p. 280)
No one has conducted the “required” study. Read more here.
Other Links:
Coming Soon ….
- About Lyons
- CANS versions
- CANS is a communimetric tool – what’s that?