Suppr超能文献

睡眠功能失调信念与态度量表完整版与简化版的心理测量学比较

Psychometric Comparison of the Full and Abbreviated Versions of the Dysfunctional Beliefs and Attitudes about Sleep Scale.

作者信息

Chung Ka-Fai, Ho Fiona Yan-Yee, Yeung Wing-Fai

机构信息

Department of Psychiatry, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR, China.

Department of Psychology, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR, China.

出版信息

J Clin Sleep Med. 2016 Jun 15;12(6):821-8. doi: 10.5664/jcsm.5878.

Abstract

STUDY OBJECTIVES

The different versions of the Dysfunctional Beliefs and Attitudes about Sleep Scale (DBAS) have limited comparison and summary of the findings across studies. We aimed to examine which version and which subscales had better psychometric properties.

METHODS

Data were derived from a randomized controlled trial of internet-based cognitive-behavioral therapy for insomnia (CBT-I) vs. waitlist in 312 participants with self-report diagnosis of insomnia disorder. The response distribution, internal consistency, construct and concurrent validity, and sensitivity to change were analyzed.

RESULTS

Floor or ceiling effects were found in 19 of the 30 DBAS items. Item-total correlation was < 0.30 in 43.3%, 31.3%, and 10.0% of the items in DBAS-30, DBAS-16, DBAS-10. Internal consistency was satisfactory for total scores, with Cronbach α ranging from 0.73-0.81, but 2 subscales of DBAS-30 and 1 subscale of DBAS-10 had Cronbach α < 0.35. Factor analysis produced 8, 4, and 3 factors for DBAS-30, DBAS-16, and DBAS-10. Only the factor structure of DBAS-16 was compatible with previous studies. Concurrent validity with insomnia, anxiety, and depressive symptoms was much stronger than with sleep diary parameters. Sensitivities to change of the DBAS scores following CBT-I and with sleep improvement were found, except the DBAS-30 "attributions" subscale and DBAS-16 "medication" subscale.

CONCLUSIONS

The DBAS-16 possesses better internal consistency, a reproducible factor structure, strong concurrent validity, and sensitivity to change, and therefore is recommended for research use. The DBAS-30 and DBAS-10 have their own strengths, but there are limitations in their application as a quantitative measure in research.

摘要

研究目的

不同版本的睡眠功能障碍信念与态度量表(DBAS)在跨研究结果的比较和总结方面存在局限性。我们旨在研究哪个版本以及哪些子量表具有更好的心理测量特性。

方法

数据来自一项针对312名自我报告诊断为失眠症的参与者进行的基于互联网的认知行为疗法(CBT-I)与等待列表的随机对照试验。分析了反应分布、内部一致性、结构和同时效度以及对变化的敏感性。

结果

在30个DBAS项目中的19个项目中发现了地板效应或天花板效应。DBAS - 30、DBAS - 16、DBAS - 10中分别有43.3%、31.3%和10.0%的项目的项目总分相关性<0.30。总分的内部一致性令人满意,Cronbach α范围为0.73 - 0.81,但DBAS - 30的2个子量表和DBAS - 10的1个子量表的Cronbach α<0.35。因子分析分别为DBAS - 30、DBAS - 16和DBAS - 10产生了8个、4个和3个因子。只有DBAS - 16的因子结构与先前的研究兼容。与失眠、焦虑和抑郁症状的同时效度比与睡眠日记参数的同时效度要强得多。发现CBT - I后DBAS分数以及随着睡眠改善对变化的敏感性,但DBAS - 30的“归因”子量表和DBAS - 16的“药物治疗”子量表除外。

结论

DBAS - 16具有更好的内部一致性、可重复的因子结构、较强的同时效度和对变化的敏感性,因此推荐用于研究。DBAS - 30和DBAS - 10有各自的优势,但在作为研究中的定量测量工具应用时存在局限性。

相似文献

6
Development of Dysfunctional Beliefs and Attitude about Sleep Scale for Cancer Patients.癌症患者睡眠障碍信念和态度量表的编制。
Behav Sleep Med. 2020 May-Jun;18(3):287-297. doi: 10.1080/15402002.2019.1578773. Epub 2019 Feb 21.

引用本文的文献

10
A Systematic Review of Instruments for the Assessment of Insomnia in Adults.成人失眠评估工具的系统评价
Nat Sci Sleep. 2020 Jul 2;12:377-409. doi: 10.2147/NSS.S250918. eCollection 2020.

本文引用的文献

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验