Suppr超能文献

在一项关于急性精神科日间医院疗效的欧洲多中心随机对照试验中,简明精神病评定量表和格罗宁根社会残疾评定表的评定者间信度。

Inter-rater reliability of the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale and the Groningen Social Disabilities Schedule in a European multi-site randomized controlled trial on the effectiveness of acute psychiatric day hospitals.

作者信息

Schützwohl Matthias, Jarosz-Nowak Joanna, Briscoe Jane, Szajowski Krzysztof, Kallert Thomas

机构信息

Department of Psychiatry at Dresden University of Technology, Dresden, Germany.

出版信息

Int J Methods Psychiatr Res. 2003;12(4):197-207. doi: 10.1002/mpr.157.

Abstract

The objectives of this study were to report the inter-rater reliability of the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS 4.0) and the Groningen Social Disabilities Schedule (GSDS-II) as assessed in a randomized controlled trial on the effectiveness of psychiatric day hospitals spanning five sites in countries of Central and Western Europe. Following brief training sessions, videotaped BPRS-interviews and written GSDS-vignettes were rated by clinically experienced researchers from all participating sites. Inter-rater reliability often proved to be poor for items assessing the severity of both psychopathology and social dysfunction, but findings suggest that both instruments allow for the assessment of the presence or absence of specific psychopathological symptoms or social disabilities. Inter-rater reliability at subscale level proved to be good for both instruments. Results indicate that, with a brief training session and proper use of the instruments, psychopathology and social disabilities can be reliably assessed within cross-national research studies. The results are of particular interest given that the need to conduct cross-national multi-site studies including countries with different cultural backgrounds increases.

摘要

本研究的目的是报告在一项关于精神科日间医院有效性的随机对照试验中,对简明精神病评定量表(BPRS 4.0)和格罗宁根社会残疾评定量表(GSDS-II)进行评估时的评分者间信度。该试验在中欧和西欧国家的五个地点开展。经过简短的培训课程后,来自所有参与地点的临床经验丰富的研究人员对BPRS访谈录像和GSDS书面 vignettes进行了评分。对于评估精神病理学和社会功能障碍严重程度的项目,评分者间信度往往较差,但研究结果表明,这两种工具都能够评估特定精神病理症状或社会残疾的存在与否。在分量表层面,两种工具的评分者间信度都被证明是良好的。结果表明,通过简短的培训课程和正确使用这些工具,可以在跨国研究中可靠地评估精神病理学和社会残疾情况。鉴于开展包括不同文化背景国家的跨国多地点研究的需求不断增加,这些结果尤其令人关注。

相似文献

8
Social disability in different mental disorders.
Eur Psychiatry. 2007 Apr;22(3):160-6. doi: 10.1016/j.eurpsy.2006.11.006. Epub 2007 Jan 16.

引用本文的文献

7
Clinical recovery in first-episode psychosis.首发精神病的临床康复
Schizophr Bull. 2009 Mar;35(2):362-9. doi: 10.1093/schbul/sbn143. Epub 2008 Nov 5.

本文引用的文献

2
The European perspective of psychiatric reform.欧洲视角下的精神科改革。
Acta Psychiatr Scand Suppl. 2001(410):8-14. doi: 10.1034/j.1600-0447.2001.1040s2008.x.
4
Outcome assessment in psychiatric service evaluation.精神科服务评估中的结果评估。
Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol. 2001 May;36(5):244-8. doi: 10.1007/s001270170055.
9
Measurement reliability and agreement in psychiatry.精神病学中的测量可靠性与一致性
Stat Methods Med Res. 1998 Sep;7(3):301-17. doi: 10.1177/096228029800700306.

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验