基于微信的电子版和纸质版 PISQ-12 在收集中文参与者报告数据方面的比较有效性和可靠性。
Comparative validity and reliability of the WeChat-based electronic and paper-and-pencil versions of the PISQ-12 for collecting participant-reported data in Chinese.
机构信息
Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences, Beijing, China.
Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Institute of Basic Medical Sciences, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences, Beijing, China.
出版信息
Menopause. 2020 Nov 16;28(3):318-324. doi: 10.1097/GME.0000000000001691.
OBJECTIVE
The objective of this study is to assess the consistency between the WeChat-based Pelvic Organ Prolapse/Urinary Incontinence Sexual Questionnaire short form (PISQ-12) in Chinese and the paper version and to determine the test-retest reliability of the WeChat questionnaire.
METHODS
A total of 120 women aged between 24 and 69 years were recruited from the outpatient clinic at Peking Union Medical College Hospital and randomly assigned to two groups. All participants completed the WeChat and paper questionnaires twice. Group A completed the paper questionnaire before the WeChat version; Group B completed the WeChat questionnaire before the paper version. Two weeks later, all participants completed the questionnaires in the opposite order. Then, the reliability and validity of the two versions were assessed using Pearson correlation coefficients, intraclass correlation coefficients, and Bland-Altman graphs.
RESULTS
No significant difference in completion time was found between the two versions of the Chinese PISQ-12 (P = 0.67). Half of the participants (60/120) preferred the WeChat questionnaire, 15% (18/120) preferred the paper form (P < 0.01), and 35% had no preference (42/120). The response time was positively correlated with age (P < 0.01) and negatively correlated with the degree of education (P < 0.01). A Pearson correlation coefficient of 0.92 and an intraclass correlation coefficient of 0.94 indicated strong consistency between the two versions. The WeChat form exhibited strong test-retest reliability (Pearson correlation coefficient, 0.86; intraclass correlation coefficient, 0.86). The Bland-Altman plots supported these results.
CONCLUSIONS
The WeChat questionnaire was preferred over the paper version in a Chinese sample and had excellent consistency with the paper version and high test-retest reliability for collecting data on private topics.
目的
本研究旨在评估基于微信的盆腔器官脱垂/尿失禁性功能问卷简体中文版（PISQ-12）与纸质版之间的一致性，并确定微信问卷的重测信度。
方法
共招募了 120 名年龄在 24 岁至 69 岁之间的女性，她们均来自北京协和医学院医院的门诊，并被随机分为两组。所有参与者均两次完成了微信和纸质问卷。组 A 先完成纸质问卷，再完成微信问卷；组 B 先完成微信问卷，再完成纸质问卷。两周后，所有参与者以相反的顺序完成问卷。然后，使用 Pearson 相关系数、组内相关系数和 Bland-Altman 图评估两种版本的可靠性和有效性。
结果
两种中文版 PISQ-12 完成时间无显著差异（P = 0.67）。半数参与者（60/120）更喜欢微信问卷，15%（18/120）更喜欢纸质问卷（P < 0.01），35%（42/120）没有偏好。回复时间与年龄呈正相关（P < 0.01），与教育程度呈负相关（P < 0.01）。0.92 的 Pearson 相关系数和 0.94 的组内相关系数表明两种版本之间具有很强的一致性。微信问卷具有很强的重测信度（Pearson 相关系数，0.86；组内相关系数，0.86）。Bland-Altman 图支持这些结果。
结论
在中国样本中，微信问卷比纸质问卷更受欢迎，与纸质问卷具有极好的一致性，并且在收集私密话题数据方面具有很高的重测信度。
Zotero 插件