Magnus Brooke E, Liu Yang, He Jason, Quinn Hally, Thissen David, Gross Heather E, DeWalt Darren A, Reeve Bryce B
Department of Psychology, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA.
School of Social Sciences, Humanities, and Arts, University of California, Merced, Merced, CA, USA.
Qual Life Res. 2016 Jul;25(7):1655-65. doi: 10.1007/s11136-015-1221-2. Epub 2016 Jan 2.
To test equivalence of scores obtained with the PROMIS(®) pediatric Depressive Symptoms, Fatigue, and Mobility measures across two modes of administration: computer self-administration and telephone interviewer-administration. If mode effects are found, to estimate the magnitude and direction of the mode effects.
Respondents from an internet survey panel completed the child self-report and parent proxy-report versions of the PROMIS(®) pediatric Depressive Symptoms, Fatigue, and Mobility measures using both computer self-administration and telephone interviewer-administration in a crossed counterbalanced design. Pearson correlations and multivariate analysis of variance were used to examine the effects of mode of administration as well as order and form effects.
Correlations between scores obtained with the two modes of administration were high. Scores were generally comparable across modes of administration, but there were some small significant effects involving mode of administration; significant differences in scores between the two modes ranged from 1.24 to 4.36 points.
Scores for these pediatric PROMIS measures are generally comparable across modes of administration. Studies planning to use multiple modes (e.g., self-administration and interviewer-administration) should exercise good study design principles to minimize possible confounding effects from mixed modes.
检验通过患者报告结果测量信息系统（PROMIS）儿童抑郁症状、疲劳和活动能力测量工具在两种施测方式（计算机自施测和电话访员施测）下获得的分数是否等效。若发现方式效应，则估计方式效应的大小和方向。
来自网络调查小组的受访者采用交叉平衡设计，通过计算机自施测和电话访员施测两种方式，完成了PROMIS儿童抑郁症状、疲劳和活动能力测量工具的儿童自评版和家长代理报告版。使用Pearson相关分析和多变量方差分析来检验施测方式的效应以及顺序和形式效应。
两种施测方式获得的分数之间相关性很高。各施测方式下的分数总体上具有可比性，但存在一些与施测方式有关的小的显著效应；两种方式的分数显著差异在1.24至4.36分之间。
这些PROMIS儿童测量工具的分数在各施测方式下总体上具有可比性。计划使用多种方式（如自施测和访员施测）的研究应运用良好的研究设计原则，以尽量减少混合方式可能产生的混杂效应。
