• 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

简短描述与详细描述在言语评定量表中的比较:中断时间序列设计。

A comparison of brief versus explicit descriptors for verbal rating scales: interrupted time series design.

机构信息

Departments of Epidemiology and Biostatistics (AV, MA, SC), Anesthesiology (PD, TM, BS) and Surgery (MH, JC, SC), Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, 485 Lexington Ave, 2Nd Floor, New York, NY, 10017, USA.

Department of Urology, (SC) Sahlgrenska Academy at Gothenburg University, Gothenburg, Sweden.

出版信息

Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2023 Sep 13;21(1):105. doi: 10.1186/s12955-023-02184-0.

DOI:10.1186/s12955-023-02184-0
PMID:37705045
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10498613/
Abstract

BACKGROUND

Verbal rating scales (VRS) are widely used in patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures. At our institution, patients complete an online instrument using VRSs with a five-point brief response scale to assess symptoms as part of routine follow-up after ambulatory cancer surgery. We received feedback from patients that the brief VRS descriptors such as "mild" or "somewhat" were vague. We added explicit descriptors to our VRSs, for instance, "Mild: I can generally ignore my pain" for pain severity or "Somewhat: I can do some things okay, but most of my daily activities are harder because of fatigue" for fatigue interference. We then compared responses before and after this change was made.

METHODS

The symptoms investigated were pain, fatigue and nausea. Our hypothesis was that the explicit descriptors would reduce overall variance. We therefore compared the coefficient of variation of scores and tested the association between symptoms scores and known predictors thereof. We also compared time to completion between questionnaires with and without the additional descriptors.

RESULTS

A total of 17,500 patients undergoing 21,497 operations were assigned questionnaires in the period before the descriptors were added; allowing for a short transition period, 1,417 patients having 1436 operations were assigned questionnaires with the additional descriptors. Symptom scores were about 10% lower with the additional descriptors but the coefficient of variation was slightly higher. Moreover, the only statistically significant difference between groups for association with a known predictor favored the item without the additional language for nausea severity (p = 0.004). Total completion time was longer when the instrument included the additional descriptors, particularly the first and second time that the questionnaire was completed.

CONCLUSIONS

Adding descriptors to a VRS of post-operative symptoms did not improve scale properties in patients undergoing ambulatory cancer surgery. We have removed the additional descriptors from our tool. We recommend further comparative psychometric research using data from PROs collected as part of routine clinical care.

摘要

背景

在患者报告的结果(PRO)测量中,广泛使用口头评分量表(VRS)。在我们的机构中,患者在门诊癌症手术后的常规随访中,使用 VRS 完成带有五点简短反应量表的在线工具,以评估症状。我们收到患者的反馈,称简短的 VRS 描述词,如“轻度”或“有些”,有些模糊。我们在 VRS 中添加了明确的描述词,例如“轻度:我通常可以忽略我的疼痛”用于疼痛严重程度,或“有些:我可以做一些事情,但由于疲劳,我的大部分日常活动都更困难”用于疲劳干扰。然后,我们比较了更改前后的反应。

方法

调查的症状包括疼痛、疲劳和恶心。我们的假设是,明确的描述词会降低整体方差。因此,我们比较了分数的变异系数,并测试了症状分数与已知预测因素之间的关联。我们还比较了带有和不带有附加描述符的问卷之间的完成时间。

结果

在添加描述符之前,共有 17500 名接受 21497 次手术的患者被分配了问卷;在允许短暂过渡的情况下,有 1417 名接受了 1436 次手术的患者被分配了带有附加描述符的问卷。添加描述符后,症状评分约降低了 10%,但变异系数略高。此外,与已知预测因素的关联中,唯一具有统计学意义的组间差异有利于没有附加语言的恶心严重程度项目(p=0.004)。当仪器包含附加描述符时,总完成时间会更长,尤其是当问卷第一次和第二次完成时。

结论

在接受门诊癌症手术的患者中,给术后症状的 VRS 添加描述词并没有改善量表特性。我们已经从我们的工具中删除了额外的描述符。我们建议使用作为常规临床护理一部分收集的 PRO 数据进行进一步的比较心理测量学研究。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/4363/10498613/a490fcfb9f01/12955_2023_2184_Fig1_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/4363/10498613/a490fcfb9f01/12955_2023_2184_Fig1_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/4363/10498613/a490fcfb9f01/12955_2023_2184_Fig1_HTML.jpg

相似文献

1
A comparison of brief versus explicit descriptors for verbal rating scales: interrupted time series design.简短描述与详细描述在言语评定量表中的比较:中断时间序列设计。
Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2023 Sep 13;21(1):105. doi: 10.1186/s12955-023-02184-0.
2
Comparative evaluations of single-item pain-intensity measures in cancer patients: Numeric rating scale vs. verbal rating scale.癌症患者单项疼痛强度测量的比较评估:数字评定量表与言语评定量表。
J Clin Nurs. 2020 Aug;29(15-16):2945-2952. doi: 10.1111/jocn.15341. Epub 2020 Jun 9.
3
Folic acid supplementation and malaria susceptibility and severity among people taking antifolate antimalarial drugs in endemic areas.在流行地区,服用抗叶酸抗疟药物的人群中,叶酸补充剂与疟疾易感性和严重程度的关系。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2022 Feb 1;2(2022):CD014217. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD014217.
4
Health-related quality of life in early breast cancer.早期乳腺癌患者的健康相关生活质量
Dan Med Bull. 2010 Sep;57(9):B4184.
5
Novel Augmentation Strategies in Major Depression.重度抑郁症的新型强化治疗策略
Dan Med J. 2017 Apr;64(4).
6
Assessment of change of quality of life in terminally ill patients under cancer pain management using the EORTC Core Quality of Life Questionnaire (QLQ-C30) in a Korean sample.使用欧洲癌症研究与治疗组织核心生活质量问卷(QLQ-C30)对韩国样本中接受癌症疼痛管理的晚期患者的生活质量变化进行评估。
Oncology. 2008;74 Suppl 1:7-12. doi: 10.1159/000143212. Epub 2008 Aug 28.
7
Studies comparing Numerical Rating Scales, Verbal Rating Scales, and Visual Analogue Scales for assessment of pain intensity in adults: a systematic literature review.比较数字评分量表、语言评分量表和视觉模拟量表评估成人疼痛强度的研究:系统文献回顾。
J Pain Symptom Manage. 2011 Jun;41(6):1073-93. doi: 10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2010.08.016.
8
Is immediate imaging important in managing low back pain?在处理下腰痛时,立即进行影像学检查重要吗?
J Athl Train. 2011 Jan-Feb;46(1):99-102. doi: 10.4085/1062-6050-46.1.99.
9
Comparing the measurement properties of visual analogue and verbal rating scales.比较视觉模拟量表和口头评分量表的测量特性。
Ophthalmic Physiol Opt. 2022 Jan;42(1):205-217. doi: 10.1111/opo.12917. Epub 2021 Nov 16.
10
Virtualized clinical studies to assess the natural history and impact of gut microbiome modulation in non-hospitalized patients with mild to moderate COVID-19 a randomized, open-label, prospective study with a parallel group study evaluating the physiologic effects of KB109 on gut microbiota structure and function: a structured summary of a study protocol for a randomized controlled study.用于评估非住院轻中度 COVID-19 患者肠道微生物组调节的自然史和影响的虚拟化临床研究:一项随机、开放标签、前瞻性研究,平行组研究评估 KB109 对肠道微生物组结构和功能的生理影响:一项随机对照研究方案的结构化总结。
Trials. 2021 Apr 2;22(1):245. doi: 10.1186/s13063-021-05157-0.

引用本文的文献

1
Implementation of Recovery Tracker: A Postdischarge Electronic Remote Symptom-Monitoring Survey Tool After Major Urologic Oncology Surgeries.康复追踪器的实施:一种大型泌尿外科肿瘤手术后出院后的电子远程症状监测调查工具
JCO Clin Cancer Inform. 2025 Apr;9:e2400328. doi: 10.1200/CCI-24-00328. Epub 2025 Apr 29.

本文引用的文献

1
Development and Validation of the Anaphylaxis Quality of Life Scale for Adults.成人过敏反应生活质量量表的制定与验证。
J Allergy Clin Immunol Pract. 2022 Jun;10(6):1527-1533.e3. doi: 10.1016/j.jaip.2022.02.023. Epub 2022 Mar 5.
2
Postoperative Pain and Age: A Retrospective Cohort Association Study.术后疼痛与年龄:一项回顾性队列关联研究。
Anesthesiology. 2021 Dec 1;135(6):1104-1119. doi: 10.1097/ALN.0000000000004000.
3
A Randomized Controlled Trial Evaluating Electronic Outpatient Symptom Monitoring After Ambulatory Cancer Surgery.
一项评估门诊癌症手术后电子门诊症状监测的随机对照试验。
Ann Surg. 2021 Sep 1;274(3):441-448. doi: 10.1097/SLA.0000000000005005.
4
Does recall period matter? Comparing PROMIS physical function with no recall, 24-hr recall, and 7-day recall.回忆期是否重要?比较 PROMIS 身体机能与无回忆、24 小时回忆和 7 天回忆。
Qual Life Res. 2020 Mar;29(3):745-753. doi: 10.1007/s11136-019-02344-0. Epub 2019 Nov 7.
5
Can 7 or 30-Day Recall Questions Capture Self-Reported Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms Accurately?7 天或 30 天回顾问题能否准确捕捉到自我报告的下尿路症状?
J Urol. 2019 Oct;202(4):770-778. doi: 10.1097/JU.0000000000000310. Epub 2019 Sep 6.
6
Does the number of response options matter? Psychometric perspectives using personality questionnaire data.反应选项的数量是否重要?使用人格问卷数据的心理计量学视角。
Psychol Assess. 2019 Apr;31(4):557-566. doi: 10.1037/pas0000648. Epub 2019 Mar 14.
7
Informing, Reassuring, or Alarming? Balancing Patient Needs in the Development of a Postsurgical Symptom Reporting System in Cancer.提供信息、安抚还是警示?在癌症术后症状报告系统开发中平衡患者需求
AMIA Annu Symp Proc. 2018 Dec 5;2018:166-174. eCollection 2018.
8
Development of the National Cancer Institute's patient-reported outcomes version of the common terminology criteria for adverse events (PRO-CTCAE).国家癌症研究所患者报告结局版通用不良事件术语标准(PRO-CTCAE)的制定。
J Natl Cancer Inst. 2014 Sep 29;106(9). doi: 10.1093/jnci/dju244. Print 2014 Sep.
9
A Randomized Study of Electronic Diary versus Paper and Pencil Collection of Patient-Reported Outcomes in Patients with Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer.非小细胞肺癌患者使用电子日记与纸笔收集患者报告结局的随机研究。
Patient. 2008 Apr 1;1(2):105-13. doi: 10.2165/01312067-200801020-00006.
10
Measuring pain in systemic sclerosis: comparison of the short-form McGill Pain Questionnaire versus a single-item measure of pain.测量系统性硬化症患者的疼痛:短版麦吉尔疼痛问卷与单项疼痛测量方法的比较。
J Rheumatol. 2011 Dec;38(12):2581-7. doi: 10.3899/jrheum.110592. Epub 2011 Oct 1.