Suppr超能文献

使用围产期悲伤量表的研究的国际比较:关于妊娠丢失的十年研究

International comparison of studies using the perinatal grief scale: a decade of research on pregnancy loss.

作者信息

Toedter L J, Lasker J N, Janssen H J

机构信息

Moravian College, Bethlehem, Pennsylvania, USA.

出版信息

Death Stud. 2001 Apr-May;25(3):205-28. doi: 10.1080/07481180125971.

Abstract

The Perinatal Grief Scale (PGS) has been used in many studies of loss in pregnancy, including miscarriage, stillbirth, induced abortion, neonatal death, and relinquishment for adoption. This article describes 22 studies from 4 countries that used the PGS with a total of 2485 participants. Studies that report Cronbach's alpha for their own samples give evidence of very high internal consistency reliability. Evidence for the validity of the PGS is also reviewed, such as convergent validity seen in its association with measures of mental health, social support, and marital satisfaction. The standard errors of the means for the total scale and for the subscales reveal fairly consistent scores, in spite of very different samples and types of loss; computation of means and standard deviations for the studies as a whole permits us to establish normal score ranges. Significantly higher scores were found in studies that recruited participants from support groups and self-selected populations rather than from medical sources, and from U.S. studies compared with those in Europe.

摘要

围产期悲伤量表(PGS)已被用于许多关于孕期丧失的研究,包括流产、死产、人工流产、新生儿死亡以及领养放弃。本文描述了来自4个国家的22项研究,这些研究使用了PGS,共有2485名参与者。报告其自身样本的克朗巴哈系数的研究提供了非常高的内部一致性信度的证据。PGS效度的证据也得到了审查,例如在其与心理健康、社会支持和婚姻满意度测量的关联中所见的聚合效度。尽管样本和丧失类型差异很大,但总量表和子量表的均值标准误差显示出相当一致的分数;对整个研究的均值和标准差进行计算使我们能够确定正常分数范围。在从支持小组和自我选择人群而非医疗来源招募参与者的研究中,以及在美国的研究与欧洲的研究相比中,发现了显著更高的分数。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验