Suppr超能文献

一般健康问卷评分方法的比较。

A comparison of methods of scoring the General Health Questionnaire.

作者信息

Newman S C, Bland R C, Orn H

机构信息

Department of Psychiatry, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada.

出版信息

Compr Psychiatry. 1988 Jul-Aug;29(4):402-8. doi: 10.1016/0010-440x(88)90021-1.

Abstract

The General Health Questionnaire (GHQ) has been criticized for failing to detect individuals with chronic symptoms due to its focus on recent changes in one's usual state. Using data from a community survey in Edmonton, Canada, in which 3,258 subjects completed the 30-item GHQ and the Diagnostic Interview Schedule (DIS), the traditional method of scoring the GHQ was compared to a revised method proposed by Goodchild and Duncan-Jones. A case was defined to be someone with a history in the preceding month of one or more of the following DIS/DSM-III disorders: major depressive episode, phobia, panic disorder and obsessive-compulsive disorder. A receiver operating characteristic analysis demonstrated no difference in the two methods of scoring the GHQ.

摘要

一般健康问卷(GHQ)因专注于个体通常状态的近期变化而未能检测出有慢性症状的个体,因此受到批评。利用加拿大埃德蒙顿一项社区调查的数据,其中3258名受试者完成了30项的GHQ和诊断访谈表(DIS),将传统的GHQ计分方法与古德柴尔德和邓肯 - 琼斯提出的修订方法进行了比较。病例定义为在前一个月内有以下一种或多种DIS/DSM - III障碍病史的人:重度抑郁发作、恐惧症、惊恐障碍和强迫症。受试者工作特征分析表明,两种GHQ计分方法没有差异。

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