Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Science, Putnam Hall, South Campus, Stony Brook University, Stony Brook, NY 11794-8790, USA.
Qual Life Res. 2010 Oct;19(8):1163-70. doi: 10.1007/s11136-010-9681-x. Epub 2010 Jun 11.
This study examined the impact of different reporting period lengths on the accuracy of items measuring interference due to pain and fatigue with work, walking, and relations with others.
Six items from well-established instruments (Brief Pain Inventory, Brief Fatigue Inventory, SF-36) were investigated in a prospective study of 117 patients with chronic rheumatological illness. Daily ratings were compared with recall ratings of 1, 3, 7, and 28-day reporting periods.
The level of recall ratings (RRs) for reporting periods of 3 days or more were significantly higher than the level of aggregated end-of-day (EOD) ratings. Correspondence between aggregated EOD and RRs was good (r ≥ .80) regardless of the length of the reporting period. Ratings of interference for a single day were highly correlated with aggregated EOD for up to 14 days prior to the single rating (r ≥ .76).
Recall ratings with reporting periods of up to a month yield good correspondence with aggregated daily ratings, although the absolute level of the rating will be inflated for recall periods of 3 days or longer.
本研究考察了不同报告期长度对疼痛和疲劳干扰工作、行走和人际关系等方面的项目准确性的影响。
对 117 例慢性风湿性疾病患者进行前瞻性研究，对来自两个成熟量表（简明疼痛量表、简明疲劳量表、SF-36）的 6 个项目进行调查。每日评分与 1、3、7 和 28 天报告期的回顾性评分进行比较。
报告期为 3 天或更长时间的回顾性评分（RR）明显高于汇总每日评分（EOD）。无论报告期的长短如何，汇总 EOD 和 RR 之间的一致性都很好（r≥.80）。单个日的干扰评分与单个评分前 14 天的汇总 EOD 高度相关（r≥.76）。
报告期为一个月的回顾性评分与汇总每日评分具有良好的一致性，尽管对于 3 天或更长的回顾性评分，评分的绝对水平会被夸大。
