Suppr超能文献

临床研究中测量主观现象的三种评定量表的比较。II. 实验控制视觉刺激的应用。

A comparison of three rating scales for measuring subjective phenomena in clinical research. II. Use of experimentally controlled visual stimuli.

作者信息

Ponce de Leon Sergio, Lara-Muñoz Carmen, Feinstein Alvan R, Wells Carolyn K

机构信息

Subdirección de Servicios Paramédicos, Instituto Nacional de Ciencias Médicas y Nutrición Salvador Zubirán (INCMNSZ), Mexico City, Mexico.

出版信息

Arch Med Res. 2004 Mar-Apr;35(2):157-62. doi: 10.1016/j.arcmed.2003.07.009.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

In a previous study of three types of global scales we found that verbal rating scales were particularly reliable for rating auditory stimuli. We now wanted to check the performance of the scales for rating experimentally controlled visual stimuli.

METHODS

We used a prospective, experimentally controlled, clinimetric study, which was conducted at the Department of Psychiatry of the Autonomous University of Puebla Medical School in the state capital city of Puebla, Mexico. A total of 20 fifth-year medical students participated in the study. Visual stimuli consisted of 15 cards with five different intensities on the gray-to-black scale, administered randomly in three sessions to each subject. With regard to main outcome measurement, validity and consistency indices were determined for visual analog scale (VAS), numerical rating score (NRS), and verbal rating scale (VRS) to rate visual stimuli.

RESULTS

For validity, correlation coefficients between scales and reference standard were high, especially in VRS (r=0.902). For consistency, VRS had highest kappa value (k(w)=0.71) for interobserver variability.

CONCLUSIONS

Three instruments could be hierarchically ranked for their indices of validity and consistency. Being more consistent than VAS and NRS, VRS merits more frequent usage in clinical research.

摘要

背景

在先前一项针对三种全球量表类型的研究中,我们发现言语评定量表在评定听觉刺激方面特别可靠。我们现在想要检验这些量表在评定实验控制的视觉刺激方面的表现。

方法

我们采用了一项前瞻性、实验控制的临床计量学研究,该研究在墨西哥普埃布拉州首府普埃布拉自治大学医学院精神病学系进行。共有20名五年级医学生参与了该研究。视觉刺激由15张卡片组成,在灰度到黑色的范围内有五种不同强度,对每个受试者分三个阶段随机发放。关于主要结局测量,确定了视觉模拟量表(VAS)、数字评定分数(NRS)和言语评定量表(VRS)评定视觉刺激的效度和一致性指标。

结果

就效度而言,量表与参考标准之间的相关系数很高,尤其是在VRS中(r = 0.902)。就一致性而言,VRS在观察者间变异性方面的kappa值最高(k(w)=0.71)。

结论

三种工具在效度和一致性指标方面可以进行层次排序。VRS比VAS和NRS更具一致性,在临床研究中更值得频繁使用。

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