Franz M, Schepank H, Wirth T, Schellberg D
Psychosomatische Klinik am Zentralinstitut, Mannheim.
Psychother Psychosom Med Psychol. 1992 Nov;42(11):392-9.
Usually little is known about probands who participated in an epidemiological longitudinal field survey but refused participation in follow-up investigations. For reasons of data protection and on account of the fact that investigative instruments used in longterm field surveys or panel studies are more focused on well defined issues (opinions, attitudes, assessment of behaviors) and less on personality variables, differentiated statements on probands who explicitly refused cooperation can hardly be made. In our epidemiological longitudinal field study on prevalence and course of psychogenic disorders we have a different situation. Within the limits of our study we had the unique opportunity to gain far-reaching information on probands who refused to participate in preceding investigations in regard to sociodemographic, psychometric and clinical variables. The clientele of refusers we present in our paper mainly comprises elderly, married, rather obsessive-compulsive structured, lower-class females. According to our data interactive aspects are equally responsible for reduced cooperativeness. The significance of our findings for the planning and carrying out of epidemiological longitudinal field surveys is discussed.
通常对于参与了流行病学纵向实地调查但拒绝参与后续调查的先证者了解甚少。出于数据保护的原因,以及考虑到长期实地调查或面板研究中使用的调查工具更多地聚焦于明确界定的问题(观点、态度、行为评估),而较少关注人格变量,因此很难对明确拒绝合作的先证者做出有差异的陈述。在我们关于心因性障碍患病率和病程的流行病学纵向实地研究中,情况有所不同。在我们研究的范围内,我们有独特的机会获得关于那些在社会人口统计学、心理测量学和临床变量方面拒绝参与先前调查的先证者的广泛信息。我们在论文中呈现的拒绝者群体主要包括老年、已婚、有较强强迫结构特征、下层社会的女性。根据我们的数据,互动方面同样是导致合作性降低的原因。本文讨论了我们的研究结果对于流行病学纵向实地调查的规划和实施的意义。