访谈和问卷版饮食障碍检查的反应模式及其对潜在结构分析的影响。
Response patterns on interview and questionnaire versions of the Eating Disorder Examination and their impact on latent structure analyses.
机构信息
Department of Psychiatry, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, USA.
出版信息
Compr Psychiatry. 2013 Jul;54(5):506-16. doi: 10.1016/j.comppsych.2012.12.006. Epub 2013 Feb 1.
OBJECTIVE
The purpose of this investigation was to compare the latent structures of the interview (EDE) and questionnaire (EDE-Q) versions of the Eating Disorder Examination.
METHODS
Participants were 280 children, adolescents, and young adults seeking eating disorder treatment. Two separate latent structure analyses (LSAs) were conducted; one used variables from the EDE as indicators and the other used the corresponding variables from the EDE-Q as indicators.
RESULTS
The EDE and EDE-Q models both yielded four-class solutions. Three of the four classes from the EDE-Q model demonstrated moderate to high concordance with their paired class from the EDE model. Using the EDE-Q to detect the EDE, the sensitivity and specificity of measuring certain classes varied from poor (18.6%) to excellent (93.7%). The overall concordance was moderate (κ=.49).
DISCUSSION
These data suggest that LSAs using the EDE and EDE-Q may be directly compared; however, differences between results may represent inconsistencies in response patterns rather than true differences in psychopathology.
目的
本研究旨在比较饮食障碍检查的访谈（EDE）和问卷（EDE-Q）版本的潜在结构。
方法
参与者为 280 名寻求饮食障碍治疗的儿童、青少年和年轻人。进行了两次单独的潜在结构分析（LSA）；一次使用 EDE 的变量作为指标，另一次使用 EDE-Q 的相应变量作为指标。
结果
EDE 和 EDE-Q 模型都产生了四分类解决方案。EDE-Q 模型的四个分类中的三个与 EDE 模型中配对的分类具有中等至高度一致性。使用 EDE-Q 来检测 EDE，测量某些分类的灵敏度和特异性从差（18.6%）到极好（93.7%）不等。整体一致性为中等（κ=.49）。
讨论
这些数据表明，使用 EDE 和 EDE-Q 的 LSA 可以直接比较；然而，结果之间的差异可能代表反应模式的不一致，而不是真正的精神病理学差异。
Zotero 插件