• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

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

认知注意综合征-1问卷的效度与信度

Validity and Reliability of Cognitive Attentional Syndrome-1 Questionnaire.

作者信息

Gündüz Anıl, Gündoğmuş İbrahim, Sertçelik Sencan, Engin Betül Hacer, İşler Aysel, Çipil Arif, Gönül Hatice, Yaşar Alişan Burak, Sungur Mehmet Zihni

机构信息

Department of Psychiatry, Haydarpaşa Numune Training and Research Hospital, Istanbul, Turkey.

Department of Psychiatry, Sultan Abdülhamid Han Training and Research Hospital, Istanbul, Turkey.

出版信息

Psychiatry Investig. 2019 May;16(5):355-362. doi: 10.30773/pi.2019.02.11.1. Epub 2019 May 23.

DOI:10.30773/pi.2019.02.11.1
PMID:31132839
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6539268/
Abstract

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to evaluate the reliability and validity of the Turkish version of Cognitive Attentional Syndrome-1 (CAS-1) questionnaire.

METHODS

221 participants were included in the study who do not meet any psychiatric diagnosis. Participants were applied SCID I and II and filled CAS-1 scale, Meta-Cognitions Questionnaire-30 (MCQ-30), Beck Depression Inventory (BDI), Beck Anxiety Inventory (BAI), Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7 (GAD-7) Scale, and Penn State Worry Questionnaire (PSWQ). Testing the reliability Cronbach's alpha, item analysis and Item and total score correlation coefficients were applied. For testing structural validity, Confirmatory Factor Analysis was used, and for testing the content validity, the relationship between each item of CAS-1 and MCQ-30, BDI, BAI, GAD-7, PSWQ was examined.

RESULTS

The correlation reliability coefficients were statistically significant except for using alcohol/drugs as a coping mechanism. Cronbach Alpha reliability coefficient of 16 items was 0.771 whereas, this ratio was 0.772 for the first eight items (CAS) and 0.685 for the last eight items (Metacognitive Beliefs) which showed that the internal consistency of CAS-1 was high. Structural and Content Validity of the scale was significant.

CONCLUSION

The Turkish version of the CAS-1 was a reliable and valid measure to evaluate CAS in a Turkish population.

摘要

目的

本研究旨在评估土耳其语版认知注意综合征-1(CAS-1)问卷的信度和效度。

方法

本研究纳入了221名未满足任何精神疾病诊断标准的参与者。对参与者进行了SCID I和II评估,并让他们填写CAS-1量表、元认知问卷-30(MCQ-30)、贝克抑郁量表(BDI)、贝克焦虑量表(BAI)、广泛性焦虑障碍-7(GAD-7)量表和宾夕法尼亚州立大学忧虑问卷(PSWQ)。采用Cronbach's alpha系数检验信度、项目分析以及项目与总分的相关系数。采用验证性因素分析检验结构效度,通过考察CAS-1各项目与MCQ-30、BDI、BAI、GAD-7、PSWQ之间的关系来检验内容效度。

结果

除将使用酒精/药物作为应对机制这一项外,相关信度系数具有统计学意义。16个条目的Cronbach Alpha信度系数为0.771,前8个条目(CAS)的该系数为0.772,后8个条目(元认知信念)的该系数为0.685,这表明CAS-1的内部一致性较高。该量表的结构效度和内容效度均显著。

结论

土耳其语版的CAS-1是评估土耳其人群中CAS的一种可靠且有效的测量工具。

相似文献

1
Validity and Reliability of Cognitive Attentional Syndrome-1 Questionnaire.认知注意综合征-1问卷的效度与信度
Psychiatry Investig. 2019 May;16(5):355-362. doi: 10.30773/pi.2019.02.11.1. Epub 2019 May 23.
2
Validity and Reliability of the Turkish Version of Generalized Anxiety Disorder Scale-Revised.广泛性焦虑障碍量表修订版土耳其语版本的效度与信度
Psychiatry Investig. 2021 Oct;18(10):949-957. doi: 10.30773/pi.2021.0174. Epub 2021 Oct 8.
3
The Validity and Reliability of the Turkish Version of the Meta-Worry Questionnaire.元担忧问卷土耳其语版本的有效性和可靠性
Noro Psikiyatr Ars. 2022 Aug 24;59(3):218-225. doi: 10.29399/npa.27926. eCollection 2022.
4
[The reliability and validity of Turkish Brief Measure of Worry Severity based on Turkish university students].基于土耳其大学生的《土耳其担忧严重程度简易量表》的信效度研究
Turk Psikiyatri Derg. 2009 Spring;20(1):68-74.
5
[Evaluation of worry: validation of a French translation of the Penn State Worry Questionnaire].[担忧评估:宾夕法尼亚州立大学担忧问卷法语翻译版的效度验证]
Encephale. 2001 Sep-Oct;27(5):475-84.
6
[Psychometric approach of metacognition: Pilot study in clinical population].[元认知的心理测量方法:临床人群的初步研究]
Encephale. 2017 Apr;43(2):120-127. doi: 10.1016/j.encep.2016.01.012. Epub 2016 Jun 24.
7
Metacognitive beliefs in depressed in-patients: adaptation and validation of the short version of the Metacognitions Questionnaire (MCQ-30) for French clinical and non-clinical samples.抑郁住院患者的元认知信念:短版元认知问卷(MCQ-30)在法国临床和非临床样本中的适应和验证。
Behav Cogn Psychother. 2020 Jul;48(4):498-502. doi: 10.1017/S1352465820000065. Epub 2020 Mar 4.
8
Screening Tool for Anxiety Disorders: Development and Validation of the Korean Anxiety Screening Assessment.焦虑症筛查工具:韩国焦虑筛查评估的开发与验证
Psychiatry Investig. 2018 Nov;15(11):1053-1063. doi: 10.30773/pi.2018.09.27.2. Epub 2018 Nov 22.
9
Assessing the validity and reliability of the Turkish versions of craving beliefs and beliefs about substance use questionnaire in patients with heroin use disorder: demonstrating valid tools to assess cognition-emotion interplay.评估土耳其语版渴求信念和物质使用信念问卷在海洛因使用障碍患者中的有效性和可靠性:展示评估认知-情感相互作用的有效工具。
Subst Abuse Treat Prev Policy. 2018 Aug 22;13(1):29. doi: 10.1186/s13011-018-0166-1.
10
Assessment of the Greek worry-related metacognitions: the Greek version of the Metacognitions Questionnaire (MCQ-30).希腊版与担忧相关的元认知评估:元认知问卷(MCQ - 30)希腊语版本。
Psychiatriki. 2014 Jan-Mar;25(1):39-47.

引用本文的文献

1
The Validity and Reliability of the Turkish Version of the Meta-Worry Questionnaire.元担忧问卷土耳其语版本的有效性和可靠性
Noro Psikiyatr Ars. 2022 Aug 24;59(3):218-225. doi: 10.29399/npa.27926. eCollection 2022.
2
Validity and Reliability of the Turkish Version of Generalized Anxiety Disorder Scale-Revised.广泛性焦虑障碍量表修订版土耳其语版本的效度与信度
Psychiatry Investig. 2021 Oct;18(10):949-957. doi: 10.30773/pi.2021.0174. Epub 2021 Oct 8.

本文引用的文献

1
The efficacy of metacognitive therapy for anxiety and depression: a meta-analytic review.元认知疗法治疗焦虑和抑郁的疗效:一项元分析综述。
Depress Anxiety. 2014 May;31(5):402-11. doi: 10.1002/da.22273.
2
Ruminative thought style and depressed mood.沉思型思维方式与抑郁情绪。
J Clin Psychol. 2009 Jan;65(1):1-19. doi: 10.1002/jclp.20542.
3
[Alcohol use-related problems in women].
Turk Psikiyatri Derg. 2008 Summer;19(2):197-208.
4
[Adaptation, validity, and reliability of the Metacognition Questionnaire-30 for the Turkish population, and its relationship to anxiety and obsessive-compulsive symptoms].《元认知问卷-30对土耳其人群的适应性、效度和信度及其与焦虑和强迫症状的关系》
Turk Psikiyatri Derg. 2008 Spring;19(1):67-80.
5
A brief measure for assessing generalized anxiety disorder: the GAD-7.一种评估广泛性焦虑症的简短量表:GAD-7量表。
Arch Intern Med. 2006 May 22;166(10):1092-7. doi: 10.1001/archinte.166.10.1092.
6
A short form of the metacognitions questionnaire: properties of the MCQ-30.元认知问卷简版:MCQ - 30的特性
Behav Res Ther. 2004 Apr;42(4):385-96. doi: 10.1016/S0005-7967(03)00147-5.
7
Difficulties and coping strategies of Chinese, Japanese, and Korean immigrant students.中国、日本和韩国移民学生的困难与应对策略。
Adolescence. 2002 Spring;37(145):69-82.
8
Modelling cognition in emotional disorder: the S-REF model.情绪障碍中的认知建模:S-REF模型。
Behav Res Ther. 1996 Nov-Dec;34(11-12):881-8. doi: 10.1016/s0005-7967(96)00050-2.
9
Internal consistencies of the original and revised Beck Depression Inventory.原始版及修订版贝克抑郁量表的内部一致性。
J Clin Psychol. 1984 Nov;40(6):1365-7. doi: 10.1002/1097-4679(198411)40:6<1365::aid-jclp2270400615>3.0.co;2-d.
10
Development and validation of the Penn State Worry Questionnaire.宾夕法尼亚州立大学担忧问卷的编制与验证
Behav Res Ther. 1990;28(6):487-95. doi: 10.1016/0005-7967(90)90135-6.