• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

油性皮肤自我评估量表(OSSAS)和油性皮肤影响量表(OSIS)的项目减少和心理计量验证。

Item reduction and psychometric validation of the Oily Skin Self Assessment Scale (OSSAS) and the Oily Skin Impact Scale (OSIS).

机构信息

Mapi Values, Bollington, UK.

出版信息

Value Health. 2009 Jul-Aug;12(5):828-37. doi: 10.1111/j.1524-4733.2009.00504.x.

DOI:10.1111/j.1524-4733.2009.00504.x
PMID:19508666
Abstract

INTRODUCTION

Developed using focus groups, the Oily Skin Self Assessment Scale (OSSAS) and Oily Skin Impact Scale (OSIS) are patient-reported outcome measures of oily facial skin.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to finalize the item-scale structure of the instruments and perform psychometric validation in adults with self-reported oily facial skin.

METHODS

The OSSAS and OSIS were administered to 202 adult subjects with oily facial skin in the United States. A subgroup of 152 subjects returned, 4 to 10 days later, for test–retest reliability evaluation.

RESULTS

Of the 202 participants, 72.8% were female; 64.4% had self-reported nonsevere acne. Item reduction resulted in a 14-item OSSAS with Sensation (five items), Tactile (four items) and Visual (four items) domains, a single blotting item, and an overall oiliness item. The OSIS was reduced to two three-item domains assessing Annoyance and Self-Image. Confirmatory factor analysis supported the construct validity of the final item-scale structures. The OSSAS and OSIS scales had acceptable item convergent validity (item-scale correlations >0.40) and floor and ceiling effects (<20%). Cronbach's alpha coefficients ranged from 0.83 to 0.89 for the OSSAS and 0.82 to 0.87 for the OSIS, demonstrating excellent internal consistency. The a priori test–retest reliability criterion (intraclass correlation [ICC] ≥0.7) was met for one of the three OSSAS domains and one of the two OSIS domains. OSSAS and OSIS domains distinguished among groups that differed in patient-reported facial oily skin severity (P < 0.0001), and bother associated with oily skin (P < 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

The OSSAS and OSIS versions tested in this study have been found to have strong psychometric properties in this patient sample (adults with self-reported oily facial skin), as assessments of self-reported oily facial skin severity and its emotional impact, respectively.

摘要

简介

油性皮肤自我评估量表(OSSAS)和油性皮肤影响量表(OSIS)是使用焦点小组开发的,用于评估面部油性皮肤的患者报告结局测量工具。

目的

本研究旨在确定这些工具的项目-量表结构,并在自我报告面部油性皮肤的成年人中进行心理测量验证。

方法

在美国,202 名有面部油性皮肤的成年人接受了 OSSAS 和 OSIS 评估。其中 152 名参与者在 4 至 10 天后返回,进行测试-重测信度评估。

结果

202 名参与者中,72.8%为女性;64.4%有自我报告的非严重痤疮。通过项目删减,得到一个 14 项的 OSSAS,包括感觉(五项)、触觉(四项)和视觉(四项)领域、一项单独的吸油面纸项目和一项整体油腻感项目。OSIS 被简化为两个评估烦恼和自我形象的三个项目领域。验证性因子分析支持最终项目-量表结构的构念效度。OSSAS 和 OSIS 量表具有可接受的项目收敛效度(项目-量表相关性>0.40)和地板和天花板效应(<20%)。OSSAS 的克朗巴赫 α 系数范围为 0.83 至 0.89,OSIS 的系数范围为 0.82 至 0.87,表明具有极好的内部一致性。OSSAS 的三个领域和 OSIS 的两个领域中,有一个领域满足了预先测试-重测可靠性标准(组内相关系数[ICC]≥0.7)。OSSAS 和 OSIS 领域可以区分患者报告的面部油性皮肤严重程度不同的人群(P<0.0001),以及与油性皮肤相关的烦恼程度(P<0.0001)。

结论

在本研究中测试的 OSSAS 和 OSIS 版本在患者样本(自我报告面部油性皮肤的成年人)中具有较强的心理测量特性,分别作为自我报告面部油性皮肤严重程度和其情绪影响的评估工具。

相似文献

1
Item reduction and psychometric validation of the Oily Skin Self Assessment Scale (OSSAS) and the Oily Skin Impact Scale (OSIS).油性皮肤自我评估量表(OSSAS)和油性皮肤影响量表(OSIS)的项目减少和心理计量验证。
Value Health. 2009 Jul-Aug;12(5):828-37. doi: 10.1111/j.1524-4733.2009.00504.x.
2
Patient experiences with oily skin: the qualitative development of content for two new patient reported outcome questionnaires.油性皮肤患者的经历:两份新的患者报告结局问卷内容的质性开发
Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2008 Oct 16;6:80. doi: 10.1186/1477-7525-6-80.
3
Craniofacial pain and disability inventory (CF-PDI): development and psychometric validation of a new questionnaire.颅面疼痛与功能障碍量表(CF-PDI):一种新问卷的编制及心理测量学验证
Pain Physician. 2014 Jan-Feb;17(1):95-108.
4
The reliability, validity, and preliminary responsiveness of the Eye Allergy Patient Impact Questionnaire (EAPIQ).眼部过敏患者影响问卷(EAPIQ)的信度、效度及初步反应性
Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2005 Oct 31;3:67. doi: 10.1186/1477-7525-3-67.
5
Development of the Chinese version of the Oro-facial Esthetic Scale.中文版口面美学量表的研制。
J Oral Rehabil. 2013 Sep;40(9):670-7. doi: 10.1111/joor.12077. Epub 2013 Jul 6.
6
Reliability and validity of the Japanese version of the Recovery Assessment Scale (RAS) for people with chronic mental illness: scale development.慢性精神疾病患者康复评估量表(RAS)的日语版的信度和效度:量表编制。
Int J Nurs Stud. 2010 Mar;47(3):314-22. doi: 10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2009.07.006. Epub 2009 Aug 12.
7
Development of a new chewing function questionnaire for assessment of a self-perceived chewing function.开发一种新的咀嚼功能问卷,用于评估自我感知的咀嚼功能。
Community Dent Oral Epidemiol. 2013 Dec;41(6):565-73. doi: 10.1111/cdoe.12048. Epub 2013 Apr 1.
8
Psychometric Evaluation of a Novel Instrument Assessing the Impact of Migraine on Physical Functioning: The Migraine Physical Function Impact Diary.评估偏头痛对身体功能影响的新工具的心理计量学评价:偏头痛身体功能影响日记。
Headache. 2017 Oct;57(9):1385-1398. doi: 10.1111/head.13162. Epub 2017 Aug 30.
9
Methodological studies of orofacial aesthetics, orofacial function and oral health-related quality of life.口腔面部美学、口腔面部功能及口腔健康相关生活质量的方法学研究。
Swed Dent J Suppl. 2010(204):11-98.
10
Development and validation of a novel patient-reported treatment satisfaction measure for hyperfunctional facial lines: facial line satisfaction questionnaire.一种用于治疗面部功能亢进性皱纹的新型患者报告治疗满意度测量工具的开发与验证:面部皱纹满意度问卷
J Cosmet Dermatol. 2015 Dec;14(4):274-85. doi: 10.1111/jocd.12166. Epub 2015 Aug 12.

引用本文的文献

1
Is Acne the Same Around the World?世界各地的痤疮情况都一样吗?
J Clin Aesthet Dermatol. 2024 Sep;17(9):16-22.
2
Do medical students like communication? Validation of the German CSAS (Communication Skills Attitude Scale).医学生喜欢沟通吗?德国CSAS(沟通技能态度量表)的验证。
GMS Z Med Ausbild. 2015 Feb 11;32(1):Doc11. doi: 10.3205/zma000953. eCollection 2015.