自尊量表信度效度研究

目的 研究自尊量表的信度效应。方法 以１６２名技校学生为测试对象，以ＳＡＳ、ＳＤＳ为效标，对ＳＥＳ进行信度和效度检验。结果 ＳＥＳ各亲衢叫分的平均相关系数为０．４８１１；分半信度系数为０．９５９３；重测信度系数为０．７８１６；与ＳＡＳ、ＳＤＳ呈正相关关系，相关系数分别为０．５２３和０．５０４。结论 ＳＥＳ具有较好的信度、效度，是一种较理想的自尊程度的评定工具，但第８条目应作适当修改。     

分离体验量表中文版信度和效度的初步研究

目的:探讨对住院精神障碍患者分离体验量表第二版(DES-II)中文版评定的信度和效度。方法:404例住院精神障碍患者进行分离体验量表的评定。6周后在初筛病例中随机抽取样本数20%进行量表重测。将DES-II量表初筛评定结果按得分高低随机排序并分组抽样:0～10分第一组抽取样本数的10%;10～20分第二组抽取30%;20～40分第三组抽取50%;40分以上第四组抽取100%。抽取99例样本进行DDIS量表评定,其中完成量表并符合分析要求量表80例,验证DES-II中文版和DDIS分量表的相关效度。结果:DES量表各项目与总分间的相关系数在0.566～0.728之间;DES-II中文版评定量表的Cronbach’s的α系数为0.957;量表奇偶分半系数分别是0.843、0.883。6周后重测量表相关系数为0.617;DES得分分组的一致性Kappa值为0.549。DES量表因子分析结果表明,量表为单一因子的一维量表。对DDIS量表除外躯体性主诉和物质滥用之外所有的13个分量表和DES量表进行关联效度分析,DDIS分量表和DES得分相关系数在0.306～0.720之间,DDIS分量表得分相加的和DES因子分的相关系数为0.994。结论:分离体验量表DES-II中文版信度和效度较好,DES和DDIS各分量表的相关性较高。DES量表可以作为临床筛查的有效工具,具有临床和科研应用价值。     

自我效能量表的信度及效度研究

目的评价自我效能量表(SES)的信度和效度.方法由专业医生对45例心身科门诊心理咨询者评定SES和症状自评量表(SCL-90),一周后重测SES.对量表的内部一致性、重测信度及平行效度进行分析.结果SES的Cronbach'sα系数为0.7984,重测后各项目的相关系数均在0.672～0.932之间.SES的总分与SCL-90总分间的相关系数为0.454,且半数以上的项目与SCL-90总分呈明显相关.结论SES具有较好的信度和效度.     

Eppendorf精神分裂症量表中文版的信度和效度

目的：研究Eppendorf精神分裂症量表(ESI)中文版的信度和效度。方法：信度评价采用分半信度、内部一致性、重测信度。效度评价采用区分效度、内容效度、平行效度、结构效度。结果：KSI量表和各因子的分半信度为0．8087—0．9738，Cronbach α系数为0．7694—0．9508；1周后重测信度为0．677—0．876。各因子与总分的相关系数在0．815—0．909之间，因子之间的相关小于因子与总分的相关；ESI与阳性症状与阴性症状量表(PANSS)有很好的相关性，因子分析得出4个因子与原作者的因子相关系数在0．747—0．943之间。结论：ESI量表有较好的信度和效度，值得推广和使用。     

Yale-Brown强迫量表中文版的信度和效度

目的评价中文版Yale-B rown强迫量表Y-BOCS的信度和效度。方法对110名强迫症患者进行Y-BOCS、HAMD、HAMA的评定。结果Y-BOCS评定者间一致性好,各条目及量表总分的ICC≥0.82;重测信度良好,各条目及量表总分的ICC≥0.75;全量表内部一致性系数(Cronbach's alpha)为0.75。Y-BOCS具有较好的内容效度和结构效度,强迫思维分量表(OS)分与HAMA和HAMD量表分存在相关,OS区分效度欠理想结论Y-BOCS中文版具有可接受的信度和效度,具有临床和科研使用的价值。     

Cornell痴呆抑郁量表的信度和效度检验

目的检测Cornell痴呆抑郁量表的信度和效度.方法对60例痴呆患者进行测试,由四位医生进行联合评定.结果Cornell痴呆抑郁量表具有良好的内部一致性,联合评定ICC=0.87、F=24.59,P＜0.01.与HAMD量表评分相比,相关系数r=0.833,P＜0.01.平行效度好,在判断抑郁程度方面F值为0.01,P＜0.01.结论Cornell痴呆抑郁量表具有良好的我信度和效度,值得在临床推广.     

自杀意向量表在中国高中学生中的评估——信度和效度研究

目的:尝试修订西方国家流行的自杀意向量表,并验证其在中国文化背景下高中学生群体里的信度和效度。方法:选取292名农村高中学生参加了研究。结果:自杀意向量表修订后具有较好的内部一致性信度。自杀意向量表得分与特质焦虑、绝望高度相关。结论:修订后的自杀意向量表能够适用于中国高中生人群。     

颅脑损伤患者生活质量量表中文版本效度和信度的初步评价

目的 评价颅脑损伤患者生活质量量表(quality of life after traumatic injury,QOLIBRI)中文版本的效度和信度.方法 选取符合纳入标准的20例患者为调查对象,用调查-再调查(test-retest)方法实施调查.通过重测信度和内部一致性Cronbach'sα系数评价其信度;进行SF-36、GOSE、HADS、MMSE量表评分,通过与QOLIBRI量表相关分析考察其效度.结果 量表各亚组的重测信度系数为0.915-0.995,具有稳定的重测信度.各亚组内部一致性系数(Cronbach'sα)为0.505-0.965,内部一致性尚可.QOLIBRI各亚组与SF-36总分显著相关,QOLIBRI(除人际关系领域外)绝大多数亚组与GOSE相关.多数亚组与HADS相关,仅少数条目与MMSE相关.结论 QOLIBRI具有较好的信度和效度.     

抑郁-焦虑-压力量表中文精简版在护理人员中信效度评价

目的评价抑郁-焦虑-压力量表中文精简版（DASS-C21）的信度和效度,为该量表在中国内地护理人群中的应用提供科学依据。方法采用随机抽样方法在长沙、郴州地区二、三级医院中抽取645例护理人员进行问卷调查;采用内部一致性信度、分半信度和建构信度进行信度评价,采用内容效度、效标关联效度和结构效度进行效度评价。结果（1）项目分析结果表明,DASS-C21各项目与总分有较高相关;（2）DASS-C21有较高的内部一致性信度、分半信度和建构信度;（3）DASS-C21有良好的效标关联效度、内容效度和结构效度。结论DASS-C21量表具有良好的信度和效度,可以作为中国内地护理人群心理健康状况的有效评价工具。     

Wolf运动功能测试量表评定卒中患者偏瘫侧上肢功能的效度和信度研究

目的 在卒中伴上肢功能障碍的患者中,评价Wolf运动功能测试（Wolf motor function test,WMFT）量表的效度和信度。      

中文版精神病人刑事责任能力评定量表的信度和效度研究

目的:探讨中文版《精神病人刑事责任能力评定量表》(中文版R-CRAS)的信度和效度。方法:国内12名不同省市的资深司法精神病学鉴定专家运用R-CRAS量表采用盲法对3例犯罪嫌疑人的辨认能力或者控制能力以及刑事责任能力的评定结果进行比较。结果:量表内部一致性系数(Cronbach'sα)r=0.846。12名评定者对全量表评定的一致性系数r=0.493,一致性最差的4个条目(第10、11、14、17题)占全量表的22.22%(r=0.099~0.294,P均0.05),提示这些条目与刑事责任能力评定或许没有必然联系。12名评定者36例次评定结果:部分、小部分、大部分、完全和无刑事责任能力的分别为7(19%)、2(6%)、8(22%)、15(42%)和4(11%)例次,提示评定者根据量表对刑事责任能力评定的结果明显不同。对于12名评定者的36例次的评分转换成等级资料,进行Friedman检验(χ2=208.824,df=17)和Kendall'W协同系数检验(Kendall'W系数=0.341,χ2=208.824,df=17),显著性均P=0.000,提示量表评分标准存在随意性。多维尺度分析发现,该量表条目按其相似性和差异性可以被划分为若干不同的范畴,仅以"辨认能力"和"控制能力"不能概括他们的特征。结论:中文版R-CRAS的设计欠合理,需进一步研究改进。     

The List of Threatening Experiences: the reliability and validity of a brief life events questionnaire

During the 23 years since the original work of Holmes & Rahe, research into stressful life events on human subjects has tended towards the development of longer and more complex inventories. The List of Threatening Experiences (LTE) of Brugha et al., by virtue of its brevity, overcomes difficulties of clinical application. In a study of 50 psychiatric patients and informants, the questionnaire version of the list (LTE-Q) was shown to have high test-retest reliability, and good agreement with informant information. Concurrent validity, based on the criterion of independently rated adversity derived from a semistructured life events interview, making use of the Life Events and Difficulties Scales (LEDS) method developed by Brown & Harris, showed both high specificity and sensitivity. The LTE-Q is particularly recommended for use in psychiatric, psychological and social studies in which other intervening variables such as social support, coping, and cognitive variables are of interest, and resources do not allow for the use of extensive interview measures of stress.     

The reliability and validity of the Chinese Polarity Inventory

For the simultaneous measurement of manic and depressive symptoms, the Chinese Polarity Inventory (CPI), a 20-item self-report scale, was developed. A total of 329 depressive and 356 manic/hypomanic patients were recruited in this scale developmental study in China. All patients completed the CPI and either the Chinese version of the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (for depressed subjects) or the Chinese version of the Bech-Rafaelsen Mania Scale (for manic subjects). The CPI was found to have excellent reliability and satisfactory concurrent validity. Construct validity analysis was performed using principal component analysis, which yielded 4 clinically meaningful factors: activity, pleasurability, capability and irritability. The CPI was sensitive in differentiating different severities of depression and mania. However, its ability to differentiate mixed phase from other mood states and its sensitivity to changes during the treatment still need to be studied further.     

中文版统一肝豆状核变性评分量表的信度和效度的研究

目的 研究中文版统一肝豆状核变性评分量表(UWDRS)的信度和效度.方法 采用翻译和回译将UWDRS翻译为中文版本.应用中文版UWDRS评价110例肝豆状核变性(HLD)患者,评价其信度和效度.结果 中文版UWDRS量表总分为31.27(20.656,0～89),神经功能得分为17.53(15.867,0～64),肝脏功能得分为6.46(6.150,0～ 36),精神症状得分为7.27 (6.045,0～ 26).量表整体Cronbach α系数为0.967,神经功能为0.975、肝脏功能为0.493、精神症状为0.798.总量表Spearman-Brown系数为0.811,神经功能为0.941,肝脏功能为0.392,精神症状为0.775.总量表2次测定的重测相关系数为0.968,神经功能为0.970、肝脏功能为0.628、精神症状得分为0.823(均P＜0.001);总量表的两位评定者间相关系数为0.920,神经功能为0.927,肝脏功能为0.584,精神症状得分为0.676(均P＜0.001).结构效度没有只出现3个明确的因子,但有6个因子解释了总变异的50.685％.总量表的平均量表水平内容效度指数(S-CVI/Ave)值为0.99.结论 中文版UWDRS具有良好的信度和效度,但部分内容尚需进一步修订.     

Validity and reliability of fatigue severity scale in stroke

Background: Fatigue is a frequent complaint after stroke and may be associated with dependence in activities of daily living, decreased quality of life, increased institutionalization and mortality. Although fatigue severity scale (FSS) is the most frequently used scale in stroke, validation studies are scarce.

Objectives: This study aimed to examine the psychometric properties of FSS in subjects with stroke.

Methods: A total of 46 subjects with stroke who were admitted for rehabilitation and 52 control subjects who were admitted for local musculoskeletal problems were included. A comprehensive assessment including functional independence measure, Folstein Mini-Mental State Examination, Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS), visual analog scale for fatigue (VAS), FSS, and vitality subscale of 36-item Medical Outcomes Study Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36v) was conducted. FSS, VAS and SF-36v were repeated 7 days later.

Results: FSS demonstrated excellent internal consistency in subjects with stroke (Cronbach’s alpha: 0.928). There was a moderate correlation between FSS and SF-36v (r = ?0.498, p < 0.001). FSS was weakly correlated with HADS anxiety (r = 0.310, p = 0.041) and HADS depression (r = 0.334, p = 0.027). Test-retest reliability of SF-36v (ICC: 0. 746, CI: 0.518–0.866), VAS (ICC: 0.829, CI: 0.671–0.911) and FSS (ICC: 0.742, CI: 0.512–0.863, p < 0.001) was good. ICC values for individual items of FSS were good except for item 6.

Conclusions: FSS is a valid and reliable scale to measure fatigue in stroke. FSS is not sensitive to differentiate fatigue in stroke from the control subjects with orthopedic problems with similar age and gender.     

A preliminary investigation of the reliability and validity of the Brief Assessment Schedule Depression Cards and the Beck Depression Inventory-Fast Screen to screen for depression in older stroke survivors

OBJECTIVE: To conduct an initial assessment of the reliability and validity of the Brief Assessment Schedule Depression Cards (BASDEC) and the Beck Depression Inventory-Fast Screen (BDI-FS) to screen for depression in older stroke survivors. METHODS: Participants from four inpatient rehabilitation units completed the BASDEC and the BDI-FS together with the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) for comparison. The Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV Axis 1 Disorders (SCID) was then completed with all participants to ascertain a criterion depression diagnosis. The BASDEC and BDI-FS were subsequently completed for a second time. RESULTS: Forty-nine stroke survivors (M=78.80, SD=6.79 years) were included. The BASDEC and BDI-FS demonstrated acceptable internal consistency and test-retest reliability. The BASDEC (cut-off >or=7) resulted in a sensitivity of 1.0 and specificity of 0.95 for detecting major depression whereas the BDI-FS (cut-off >or=4) had a sensitivity of 0.71 and specificity of 0.74. When participants with minor depression were included in analyses, sensitivity lowered to 0.69 (specificity=0.97) for the BASDEC and 0.62 (specificity=0.78) for the BDI-FS. CONCLUSIONS: The BASDEC and BDI-FS were found to have acceptable reliability. The BASDEC demonstrated some advantage in criterion validity over the BDI-FS at the examined cut-offs.     

中文版心境障碍自知力量表信效度初步研究

目的:评价心境障碍自知力量表(mood disorders insight scale,MDIS)中文版的信度和效度。方法:131例符合美国精神障碍诊断与统计手册第4版心境障碍诊断标准的患者完成MDIS中文版测试,由精神科医师采用临床总体印象量表(CGI)和自知力视觉尺度量表评估其疾病严重程度和自知力;同时,家属也完成自知力视觉尺度量表。随机抽取50例患者间隔7 d后重测MDIS。计算量表Cronbach’sα系数和两次评分的相关系数,评价量表的内部一致性和1周重测信度;采用因子分析方法考评结构效度;通过MDIS评分与精神科医师及家属的自知力视觉尺度量表评分相关分析来考察效标效度;通过比较重度和轻中度疾病严重程度患者MDIS得分差异来考评实证效度。结果:1信度:MDIS量表总Cronbach’sα系数为0.81,1周重测信度系数为0.82;2效度:探索性因子分析显示MDIS符合两因子结构,贡献率达65.75%;验证性因子分析的拟合优度指数为0.900,赋范拟合指数为0.931,标准化残差均方根为0.064;3患者MDIS分值与精神科医师及家属自知力视觉尺度评分之间相关系数分别为0.74和0.59(P均0.05),与CGI评分相关系数为-0.87(P0.05)。轻中度与重度躁狂发作患者MDIS量表分值差异具有统计学意义(P0.05)。结论:MDIS中文版具有较好的信度和效度,可用于快速有效地评估心境障碍患者的自知力。     

Norwegian version of the rating anxiety in dementia scale (RAID-N): a validity and reliability study

Objectives: Dementia-specific anxiety scales in the Norwegian language are lacking; the aim of this study was to investigate the validity and inter-rater reliability of a Norwegian version of the Rating Anxiety in Dementia (RAID-N) scale.

Method: The validity of the RAID-N was tested in a sample of 101 patients with dementia from seven Norwegian nursing homes. One psychogeriatrician (n = 50) or a physician with long experience with nursing home patients (n = 51) ‘blind’ to the RAID-N score diagnosed anxiety according to DSM-5 criteria of generalised anxiety disorder (GAD). A receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis assessed the best cut-off point for the RAID-N, and the area under the curve (AUC) was calculated. Inter-rater reliability was tested in a subgroup of 53 patients by intraclass correlation (ICC) and Cohen's kappa.

Results: Twenty-eight of 101 (27.7%) met the GAD criteria. The mean RAID-N score for patients with GAD was 16.1 (SD 6.3) and without GAD, 8.8 (SD 6.5) (p < 0.001). A cut-off score of ≥12 on the RAID-N gave a sensitivity of 82.1%, specificity of 70.0%, and 73.3% accuracy in identifying clinically significant GAD in patients with dementia. Inter-rater reliability on overall RAID-N items was good (ICC = 0.82), Cohen's kappa was 0.58 for total RAID-N score, with satisfactory internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha = 0.81).

Conclusion: The RAID-N has fairly good validity and inter-rater reliability, and could be useful to assess GAD in patients with dementia. Further studies should investigate the optimal RAID-N cut-off score in different settings.