Dixon Diane, Pollard Beth, Johnston Marie
Department of Psychology, University of Stirling, Stirling FK9 4LA, UK Institute of Applied Health Sciences, University of Aberdeen, UK.
Pain. 2007 Aug;130(3):249-253. doi: 10.1016/j.pain.2006.12.004. Epub 2007 Jan 25.
This study explored the ability of the Chronic Pain Grade Questionnaire (CPG) to operationalise the WHO's model of health outcomes, namely the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF). Twelve expert judges used the method of discriminant content validation to allocate the seven items of the CPG to one or more ICF outcome, namely, impairment, activity limitations and participation restrictions. One-sample t-tests classified each item as measuring impairment, activity limitations or participation restrictions, or a combination thereof. The results indicated that the CPG contains items able to measure each of the three ICF outcomes. However, the pain grade classification system used in the CPG conflates the ICF outcomes. The implication of this conflation of outcome for the assessment of interventions is discussed.
本研究探讨了慢性疼痛分级问卷（CPG）将世界卫生组织的健康结果模型（即《国际功能、残疾和健康分类》，ICF）进行实际应用的能力。十二位专家评委采用判别性内容效度法，将CPG的七个项目分配到一个或多个ICF结果中，即损伤、活动受限和参与限制。单样本t检验将每个项目归类为测量损伤、活动受限或参与限制，或它们的组合。结果表明，CPG包含能够测量ICF三个结果中每一个结果的项目。然而，CPG中使用的疼痛分级分类系统混淆了ICF结果。文中讨论了这种结果混淆对干预措施评估的影响。
