• 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

细节决定成败:关于认知访谈在加强全球卫生定量调查中的价值及应用的思考

The devil is in the detail: reflections on the value and application of cognitive interviewing to strengthen quantitative surveys in global health.

作者信息

Scott K, Ummer O, LeFevre A E

机构信息

Department of International Health, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, 615 N. Wolfe Street, Baltimore, MD 21205, USA.

Oxford Policy Management, 4/6 1st Floor, Siri Fort Institutional Area, 11049 New Delhi, India.

出版信息

Health Policy Plan. 2021 Jun 25;36(6):982-995. doi: 10.1093/heapol/czab048.

DOI:10.1093/heapol/czab048
PMID:33978729
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8227989/
Abstract

Cognitive interviewing is a qualitative research method for improving the validity of quantitative surveys, which has been underused by academic researchers and monitoring and evaluation teams in global health. Draft survey questions are administered to participants drawn from the same population as the respondent group for the survey itself. The interviewer facilitates a detailed discussion with the participant to assess how the participant interpreted each question and how they formulated their response. Draft survey questions are revised and undergo additional rounds of cognitive interviewing until they achieve high comprehension and cognitive match between the research team's intent and the target population's interpretation. This methodology is particularly important in global health when surveys involve translation or are developed by researchers who differ from the population being surveyed in terms of socio-demographic characteristics, worldview, or other aspects of identity. Without cognitive interviewing, surveys risk measurement error by including questions that respondents find incomprehensible, that respondents are unable to accurately answer, or that respondents interpret in unintended ways. This methodological musing seeks to encourage a wider uptake of cognitive interviewing in global public health research, provide practical guidance on its application, and prompt discussion on its value and practice. To this end, we define cognitive interviewing, discuss how cognitive interviewing compares to other forms of survey tool development and validation, and present practical steps for its application. These steps cover defining the scope of cognitive interviews, selecting and training researchers to conduct cognitive interviews, sampling participants, collecting data, debriefing, analysing the emerging findings, and ultimately generating revised, validated survey questions. We close by presenting recommendations to ensure quality in cognitive interviewing.

摘要

认知访谈是一种用于提高定量调查有效性的定性研究方法,全球卫生领域的学术研究人员以及监测和评估团队对其使用不足。将调查问卷初稿发放给与调查对象来自同一人群的参与者。访谈者协助与参与者进行详细讨论,以评估参与者如何理解每个问题以及他们如何形成自己的回答。调查问卷初稿经过修订,并进行多轮认知访谈,直到研究团队的意图与目标人群的理解之间达到高度的理解度和认知匹配。当调查涉及翻译,或者由社会人口特征、世界观或其他身份特征与被调查人群不同的研究人员开展时,这种方法在全球卫生领域尤为重要。如果没有认知访谈,调查问卷可能会因包含受访者难以理解、无法准确回答或理解方式与预期不符的问题而出现测量误差。本文旨在鼓励全球公共卫生研究更广泛地采用认知访谈,提供其应用的实用指南,并引发对其价值和实践的讨论。为此,我们定义了认知访谈,讨论了认知访谈与其他形式的调查工具开发和验证方法的比较,并介绍了其应用的实际步骤。这些步骤包括确定认知访谈的范围、挑选和培训进行认知访谈的研究人员、选取参与者样本、收集数据、听取汇报、分析新出现的结果,最终生成经过修订和验证的调查问卷问题。最后,我们提出了确保认知访谈质量的建议。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/d871/8227989/bdfd222969c5/czab048f3.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/d871/8227989/d5b6698ad7f8/czab048f1.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/d871/8227989/22222f98cc79/czab048f2.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/d871/8227989/bdfd222969c5/czab048f3.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/d871/8227989/d5b6698ad7f8/czab048f1.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/d871/8227989/22222f98cc79/czab048f2.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/d871/8227989/bdfd222969c5/czab048f3.jpg

相似文献

1
The devil is in the detail: reflections on the value and application of cognitive interviewing to strengthen quantitative surveys in global health.细节决定成败:关于认知访谈在加强全球卫生定量调查中的价值及应用的思考
Health Policy Plan. 2021 Jun 25;36(6):982-995. doi: 10.1093/heapol/czab048.
2
Yes, no, maybe so: the importance of cognitive interviewing to enhance structured surveys on respectful maternity care in northern India.是,否,也许吧:认知访谈对加强印度北部尊重产妇护理的结构化调查的重要性。
Health Policy Plan. 2020 Feb 1;35(1):67-77. doi: 10.1093/heapol/czz141.
3
Cognitive interviewing: verbal data in the design and pretesting of questionnaires.认知访谈:问卷设计与预测试中的言语数据
J Adv Nurs. 2003 Apr;42(1):57-63. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2648.2003.02579.x.
4
Using the cognitive interviewing process to improve survey design by allied health: A qualitative study.运用认知访谈法改善联合健康领域的调查设计:一项定性研究。
Aust Occup Ther J. 2018 Apr;65(2):126-134. doi: 10.1111/1440-1630.12445. Epub 2017 Dec 22.
5
Enriching the quality of cross-cultural instrument development through cognitive interviewing: Implications for nursing research.通过认知访谈丰富跨文化工具开发的质量:对护理研究的启示
Jpn J Nurs Sci. 2020 Apr;17(2):e12301. doi: 10.1111/jjns.12301. Epub 2019 Nov 13.
6
Application of cognitive interviewing to improve self-administered questionnaires used in small scale social pharmacy research.应用认知访谈改进小规模社会药房研究中使用的自填式问卷。
Res Social Adm Pharm. 2014 Mar-Apr;10(2):469-74. doi: 10.1016/j.sapharm.2013.06.007. Epub 2013 Jul 17.
7
Using cognitive interviewing to improve questionnaires: An exemplar study focusing on individual and condition-specific factors.运用认知访谈来改进问卷:一项关注个体和条件特异性因素的范例研究。
Appl Nurs Res. 2018 Oct;43:121-125. doi: 10.1016/j.apnr.2018.06.007. Epub 2018 Jun 20.
8
Validation studies for population-based intervention coverage indicators: design, analysis, and interpretation.基于人群的干预措施覆盖指标的验证研究:设计、分析和解释。
J Glob Health. 2018 Dec;8(2):020804. doi: 10.7189/jogh.08.020804.
9
Improving question wording in surveys of culturally diverse populations.改进针对文化多元群体的调查中的问题措辞。
Ann Epidemiol. 1997 Jul;7(5):334-42. doi: 10.1016/s1047-2797(97)00030-6.
10
Update on the harmonisation of disability data collection in UK surveys (part 1).英国调查中残疾数据收集的协调更新(第1部分)。
Health Stat Q. 2011 Autumn(51):3-30. doi: 10.1057/hsq.2011.12.

引用本文的文献

1
The Mexican Version of the Interactive mHealth App Usability Questionnaire (Mx-MAUQ) in Women With Breast Cancer: Instrument Validation Study.墨西哥版乳腺癌女性交互式移动健康应用程序可用性问卷(Mx-MAUQ):工具验证研究
J Med Internet Res. 2025 Aug 29;27:e72215. doi: 10.2196/72215.
2
Spanish Translation and Cultural Adaptation of the Wolf Motor Function Test for Survivors of Acquired Brain Injury.针对后天性脑损伤幸存者的狼运动功能测试的西班牙语翻译及文化调适
Healthcare (Basel). 2025 Aug 11;13(16):1969. doi: 10.3390/healthcare13161969.
3
A Protocol for the Development and Validation of the Postpartum Specific Anxiety Scale-Preterm Birth [PSAS-PTB] and the Postpartum Specific Anxiety Scale-Neonatal Intensive Care Unit [PSAS-NICU].

本文引用的文献

1
Yes, no, maybe so: the importance of cognitive interviewing to enhance structured surveys on respectful maternity care in northern India.是,否,也许吧:认知访谈对加强印度北部尊重产妇护理的结构化调查的重要性。
Health Policy Plan. 2020 Feb 1;35(1):67-77. doi: 10.1093/heapol/czz141.
2
Are stage-based health information messages effective and good value for money in improving maternal newborn and child health outcomes in India? Protocol for an individually randomized controlled trial.基于阶段的健康信息传递在改善印度母婴和儿童健康结局方面是否有效且物有所值?一项个体随机对照试验方案。
Trials. 2019 May 15;20(1):272. doi: 10.1186/s13063-019-3369-5.
3
产后特定焦虑量表 - 早产[PSAS - PTB]及产后特定焦虑量表 - 新生儿重症监护病房[PSAS - NICU]的开发与验证方案
Int J Methods Psychiatr Res. 2025 Sep;34(3):e70032. doi: 10.1002/mpr.70032.
4
Cognitive Interviews: Recommendations for Best Practices in Clinical Outcome Assessment (COA) Measure Development and Validation.认知访谈:临床结局评估(COA)测量工具开发与验证的最佳实践建议
Patient. 2025 Jul 24. doi: 10.1007/s40271-025-00752-8.
5
Translation and cross-cultural adaptation of Integrated Palliative Care Outcome Scale for Dementia.《痴呆症综合姑息治疗结果量表》的翻译及跨文化调适
Palliat Med. 2025 Sep;39(8):897-909. doi: 10.1177/02692163251347826. Epub 2025 Jul 13.
6
Quantifying participant distress: Validity and applicability of a distress measure to evaluate harm in quantitative assessments.量化参与者的痛苦:一种痛苦测量方法在定量评估中评估伤害的有效性和适用性。
PLoS One. 2025 Jul 2;20(7):e0326957. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0326957. eCollection 2025.
7
Development and validation of Mental Health Literacy Assessment Scale among community health workers in Nepal.尼泊尔社区卫生工作者心理健康素养评估量表的编制与验证
SAGE Open Med. 2025 Jun 14;13:20503121251341423. doi: 10.1177/20503121251341423. eCollection 2025.
8
Men's understanding of three different measures of transactional sex: A cognitive interviewing study among men in Rakai, Uganda.男性对交易性行为三种不同衡量方式的理解:乌干达拉凯地区男性的认知访谈研究
Res Sq. 2025 May 2:rs.3.rs-6465876. doi: 10.21203/rs.3.rs-6465876/v1.
9
Occupational therapy practice to support executive function impairment after acquired brain injury: A UK clinical survey.支持后天性脑损伤后执行功能障碍的职业治疗实践:一项英国临床调查。
Br J Occup Ther. 2024 Apr;87(4):239-250. doi: 10.1177/03080226231206686. Epub 2023 Nov 3.
10
Unpacking beauty norms and body image: Development and validation of the perceptions of beauty standards scale.剖析审美标准与身体形象:“美丽标准认知量表”的编制与验证
SAGE Open Med. 2025 Mar 12;13:20503121251324085. doi: 10.1177/20503121251324085. eCollection 2025.
Developing citizen report cards for primary health care in low and middle-income countries: Results from cognitive interviews in rural Tajikistan.
为低收入和中等收入国家的初级卫生保健制定公民报告卡:塔吉克斯坦农村认知访谈的结果
PLoS One. 2017 Oct 24;12(10):e0186745. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0186745. eCollection 2017.
4
Development and validation of the patient evaluation scale (PES) for primary health care in Nigeria.尼日利亚初级卫生保健患者评估量表(PES)的开发与验证
Prim Health Care Res Dev. 2017 Mar;18(2):161-182. doi: 10.1017/S1463423616000244. Epub 2016 Oct 3.
5
Measurement of breastfeeding initiation: Ethiopian mothers' perception about survey questions assessing early initiation of breastfeeding.母乳喂养开始情况的测量:埃塞俄比亚母亲对评估母乳喂养早期开始情况的调查问题的看法。
Int Breastfeed J. 2014 Aug 25;9:13. doi: 10.1186/1746-4358-9-13. eCollection 2014.
6
What Do Our Respondents Think We're Asking? Using Cognitive Interviewing to Improve Medical Education Surveys.我们的受访者认为我们在问什么?运用认知访谈改进医学教育调查。
J Grad Med Educ. 2013 Sep;5(3):353-6. doi: 10.4300/JGME-D-13-00154.1.
7
Understanding pregnancy planning in a low-income country setting: validation of the London measure of unplanned pregnancy in Malawi.理解低收入国家的生育计划:马拉维伦敦意外怀孕量表的验证。
BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2013 Nov 5;13:200. doi: 10.1186/1471-2393-13-200.
8
Cognitive testing of the WHOQOL-BREF Bangladesh tool in a northern rural Bangladeshi population with lymphatic filariasis.在孟加拉国北部农村淋巴丝虫病人群中对世界卫生组织生活质量简表孟加拉国工具进行认知测试。
Qual Life Res. 2013 Oct;22(8):1917-26. doi: 10.1007/s11136-012-0333-1. Epub 2013 Jan 1.
9
A primer on the validity of assessment instruments.评估工具效度入门
J Grad Med Educ. 2011 Jun;3(2):119-20. doi: 10.4300/JGME-D-11-00075.1.
10
Justification of intimate partner violence in rural Bangladesh: what survey questions fail to capture.孟加拉国农村地区亲密伴侣暴力合理化:调查问题未能捕捉到的内容。
Stud Fam Plann. 2011 Mar;42(1):21-8. doi: 10.1111/j.1728-4465.2011.00261.x.