Maassen Gerard H
Department of Methodology and Statistics, Faculty of Social Sciences, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
J Int Neuropsychol Soc. 2004 Oct;10(6):888-93. doi: 10.1017/s1355617704106097.
Researchers and clinicians using Jacobson and Truax's index to assess the reliability of change in patients, or its counterpart by Chelune et al., which takes practice effects into account, are confused by the different ways of calculating the standard error encountered in the literature (see the discussion started in this journal by Hinton-Bayre). This article compares the characteristics of (1) the standard error used by Jacobson and Truax, (2) the standard error of difference scores used by Temkin et al. and (3) an adaptation of Jacobson and Truax's approach that accounts for difference between initial and final variance. It is theoretically demonstrated that the last variant is preferable, which is corroborated by real data.
研究人员和临床医生在使用雅各布森和特鲁克斯的指数来评估患者变化的可靠性，或者使用切卢内等人考虑了练习效应的对应指数时，会因文献中计算标准误差的不同方法而感到困惑（见本期刊由辛顿 - 贝雷发起的讨论）。本文比较了以下三种标准误差的特点：（1）雅各布森和特鲁克斯使用的标准误差；（2）坦金等人使用的差异分数标准误差；（3）对雅各布森和特鲁克斯方法的一种改进，该方法考虑了初始方差和最终方差之间的差异。理论证明最后一种变体更可取，实际数据也证实了这一点。
