School of Nursing, University of Kansas Medical Center, Kansas City, KS 66160, USA.
Nurs Res. 2012 May-Jun;61(3):181-7. doi: 10.1097/NNR.0b013e318253341b.
Little is known about measuring equivalence between two rating scales. Measuring the equivalence between two rating scales requires a study design and analysis conducive to clear interpretation of actual equivalence with simple inferences.
The aim of this study was to show the use of bayesian methodology in determining equivalence within a simulated content validity study (to establish equivalence, not content validity).
Participants were randomized into two groups and responded to the items' perceived relevance or perceived correlation to a construct, job enjoyment. Items from the National Database of Nursing Quality Indicators were used.
Eighty-seven nursing faculty members from various schools of nursing participated. Findings revealed in all items having a posterior probability of >95% that rating scales are equivalent using an informative prior whereas using a weak or flat prior led to a minimal decrease in posterior probability results.
Prior and new information collected from this study was used to determine a posterior probability that a mean difference (±0.5 points) between the relevance and correlation group exists, thereby demonstrating equivalence between two rating scales.
关于衡量两个评分量表之间的等效性，人们知之甚少。衡量两个评分量表之间的等效性需要进行有利于清晰解释实际等效性的研究设计和分析，并进行简单的推断。
本研究旨在展示贝叶斯方法在模拟内容有效性研究中确定等效性的应用（确定等效性，而不是内容有效性）。
参与者被随机分为两组，对项目的感知相关性或与构念（工作满意度）的相关性进行回答。使用了来自国家护理质量指标数据库的项目。
来自不同护理学院的 87 名护理教师参与了研究。研究结果显示，在所有项目中，使用信息性先验的后验概率>95%，表明评分量表是等效的，而使用弱或平坦的先验则导致后验概率结果的微小下降。
本研究中使用先验和新收集的信息来确定相关性和相关性组之间的平均差异（±0.5 分）的后验概率，从而证明了两个评分量表之间的等效性。
