Chan Kitty S, Orlando Maria, Ghosh-Dastidar Bonnie, Duan Naihua, Sherbourne Cathy D
Health Program, RAND Corporation, Santa Monica, CA 90407-2138, USA.
Med Care. 2004 Mar;42(3):281-9. doi: 10.1097/01.mlr.0000115632.78486.1f.
Evidence of a mode effect has raised concerns about the comparability and validity of self- versus interviewer-administered versions of the Center for Epidemiological Studies Depression (CES-D) scale. Response anonymity has been proposed to explain this effect. However, the factors that contribute to this mode effect are not well understood. We used item response theory (IRT) to examine the nature of the CES-D mode effect.
A sample of depressed primary care patients from the Partners-in-Care Study were randomized to receive either a phone interview (N=139) or a mail survey (N=139) of the CES-D. We used likelihood ratio tests to identify differentially functioning items in the 2 groups. Category response curves are used to describe these effects.
Twelve items manifested differential functioning. Category response curves consistently indicate that phone respondents had a lower probability of endorsing the third of 4 response categories than mail respondents, suggesting a possible cognitive effect.
Although response anonymity could be important in mode effects observed in surveys of sensitive topics, cognitive factors appear more important to the mode effect in the CES-D.
模式效应的证据引发了人们对流行病学研究中心抑郁量表（CES-D）自填式与访谈式版本的可比性和有效性的担忧。有人提出回应匿名性来解释这种效应。然而，导致这种模式效应的因素尚未得到很好的理解。我们使用项目反应理论（IRT）来研究CES-D模式效应的本质。
来自“关爱伙伴研究”的抑郁症初级保健患者样本被随机分为两组，分别接受CES-D的电话访谈（N = 139）或邮寄调查（N = 139）。我们使用似然比检验来识别两组中功能不同的项目。类别反应曲线用于描述这些效应。
12个项目表现出功能差异。类别反应曲线一致表明，电话受访者认可4个反应类别中第三个类别的概率低于邮寄受访者，这表明可能存在认知效应。
尽管回应匿名性在敏感话题调查中观察到的模式效应中可能很重要，但认知因素似乎对CES-D中的模式效应更为重要。
