Sauerborn R, Morley D C, Bullough C H
Harvard School of Public Health, Department of Population Sciences, Boston, MA 02115.
Salud Publica Mex. 1991 Mar-Apr;33(2):106-11.
Most anthropometric studies fail to comment on the reliability of the measures. The authors assume that the complexity of the classical analysis of variance approach is one of the reasons for this. They therefore describe a simpler, yet scientifically sound method which assesses three sources of measurement error: intra and inter-observer as well as instrument errors. The measure of upper-arm-circumference of pregnant women, which has been proposed to be a predictor of birth-weight, is used as an example. Reliability was assessed by calculating agreement of a series of pairs of measurements. Inter and intra-observer-errors were found to be of the same size. Both types of human errors were statistically significantly greater than the error arising from the use of two different types of tapes (instrument error). It is hoped that other authors find this approach useful so that information on reliability in anthropometric studies becomes the rule rather the exception.
大多数人体测量学研究都未对测量的可靠性进行评论。作者认为经典方差分析方法的复杂性是造成这种情况的原因之一。因此，他们描述了一种更简单但科学合理的方法，该方法评估三种测量误差来源：观察者内和观察者间误差以及仪器误差。以已被提议作为出生体重预测指标的孕妇上臂围测量为例。通过计算一系列测量值对之间的一致性来评估可靠性。发现观察者间误差和观察者内误差大小相同。这两种人为误差在统计学上均显著大于使用两种不同类型卷尺产生的误差（仪器误差）。希望其他作者发现这种方法有用，以便人体测量学研究中的可靠性信息成为常态而非例外。
