Janda Carolyn, Kues Johanna N, Andersson Gerhard, Kleinstäuber Maria, Weise Cornelia
a Division of Clinical Psychology and Psychotherapy, Department of Psychology , Philipps University , Marburg , Germany.
b Linnaeus Centre HEAD, Swedish Institute for Disability Research, Department of Behavioural Sciences and Learning , Linköping University , Linköping , Sweden.
Women Health. 2017 Aug;57(7):837-854. doi: 10.1080/03630242.2016.1206055. Epub 2016 Jun 29.
The differentiation between premenstrual syndrome (PMS) and premenstrual dysphoric disorder (PMDD) has been widely discussed. PMDD is listed as a mental disorder in the DSM-5, whereas PMS is not considered as a mental disorder in any diagnostic manual. Consequently, PMS is operationalized in different ways. Keeping a symptom diary is required to diagnose PMDD but is also recommended for PMS. The aim of our study was, therefore, to operationalize PMS and PMDD within a DSM-5-based symptom diary. We developed a symptom-intensity-score (SI-score) and an interference-score (INT-score) to evaluate the symptom diary. Ninety-eight women (aged 20-45 years) completed a symptom diary over two menstrual cycles, a retrospective screening for premenstrual symptoms, and answered additional impairment questionnaires from August 2013 to August 2015. The scores revealed moderate to good reliability (Cronbach's α = 0.83-0.96). Convergent validity was shown by significant correlations with a retrospective screening, the Pain Disability Index, and the German PMS-Impact Questionnaire. Discriminant validity was indicated by low correlations with the Big Five Inventory-10. These scores may facilitate the evaluation of prospective symptom ratings in research and clinical practice. Future research should focus on continuing to validate the scores (e.g., in an ambulatory setting).
经前综合征（PMS）和经前烦躁障碍（PMDD）之间的区别已得到广泛讨论。PMDD在《精神疾病诊断与统计手册》第5版（DSM - 5）中被列为精神障碍，而PMS在任何诊断手册中都不被视为精神障碍。因此，PMS的操作定义方式有所不同。诊断PMDD需要记录症状日记，PMS也建议使用。因此，我们研究的目的是在基于DSM - 5的症状日记中对PMS和PMDD进行操作定义。我们开发了症状强度评分（SI评分）和干扰评分（INT评分）来评估症状日记。从2013年8月到2015年8月，98名年龄在20 - 45岁之间的女性完成了两个月经周期的症状日记、经前症状的回顾性筛查，并回答了额外的功能损害问卷。评分显示出中等至良好的信度（克朗巴哈系数α = 0.83 - 0.96）。与回顾性筛查、疼痛残疾指数和德国PMS影响问卷的显著相关性表明了收敛效度。与大五人格量表-10的低相关性表明了区分效度。这些评分可能有助于在研究和临床实践中评估前瞻性症状评级。未来的研究应专注于继续验证这些评分（例如，在门诊环境中）。
