Littman Alyson J, White Emily, Satia Jessie A, Bowen Deborah J, Kristal Alan R
Division of Public Health Sciences, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA 98109-1024, USA.
Epidemiology. 2006 Jul;17(4):398-403. doi: 10.1097/01.ede.0000219721.89552.51.
Practical limitations in epidemiologic research may necessitate use of only a few questions for assessing the complex phenomenon called "stress." The objective of this study was to evaluate the measurement characteristics of 2 single-item measures on the amount of stress and the ability to handle stress.
We selected 218 adults age 50 to 76 years living in western Washington state from a large prospective cohort study of lifestyle factors and cancer risk to evaluate the 3-month test-retest reliability and intermethod reliability of the stress questions. To assess the latter, we compared 2 single-item measures on stress with 3 more fully validated multi-item instruments on perceived stress, daily hassles, and life events, which assessed the same underlying constructs as the single-item measures.
The test-retest reliabilities for the single-item stress measures were good (kappa and intraclass correlations between 0.66 and 0.74). The intermethod reliabilities comparing the 2 single-item stress measures with 3 multi-item instruments were moderate (r = 0.31-0.46) and comparable to correlations observed among the 3 multi-item instruments (r = 0.25-0.47).
The 2 single-item stress measures are reliable at measuring stress with validity similar to longer questionnaires. Single-item measures offer a practical instrument for assessing stress in large prospective epidemiologic studies that lack space for longer instruments.
流行病学研究中的实际限制可能使得在评估被称为“压力”的复杂现象时仅使用几个问题。本研究的目的是评估两项关于压力程度和应对压力能力的单项测量指标的测量特性。
我们从一项关于生活方式因素与癌症风险的大型前瞻性队列研究中选取了218名年龄在50至76岁之间、居住在华盛顿州西部的成年人,以评估压力问题的3个月重测信度和不同测量方法间的信度。为评估后者,我们将两项关于压力的单项测量指标与另外三项在感知压力、日常烦恼和生活事件方面经过更充分验证的多项目工具进行了比较,这三项多项目工具评估的是与单项测量指标相同的潜在结构。
单项压力测量指标的重测信度良好(kappa系数和组内相关系数在0.66至0.74之间)。将两项单项压力测量指标与三项多项目工具进行比较的不同测量方法间的信度中等(r = 0.