综合精神病理学评定量表（CPRS）与精神病学方法与文献协会（AMP）系统的比较。

Comparison between Comprehensive Psychopathological Rating Scale (CPRS) and association for methodology and documentation in psychiatry (AMP) system.

作者信息

Woggon B

机构信息

Psychiatrische Universitätsklinik, Forschungsdirektion, Zürich, Switzerland.

出版信息

Prog Neuropsychopharmacol. 1979;3(4):423-7. doi: 10.1016/0364-7722(79)90057-2.

DOI:10.1016/0364-7722(79)90057-2

Abstract

5 AMP experienced raters examined 28 depressed and 22 psychotic patients. Symptoms were documented using the CPRS (preliminary German translation) and the AMP system. The two rating scales were compared from the raters point of views and using descriptive statistical methods. 2. The high number of CPRS symptoms showing significant correlations to AMP symptoms demonstrate a strong similarity between the two rating scales. 3. The AMP system gives a more differentiated and comprehensive picture of the psychopathology than the CPRS. 4. The CPRS seems to us to be easily communicable, mainly due to the exact description of the scale steps and the differentiation of reported and observed items. 5. For the measurement of changes during treatment half steps should be used to increase the sensitivity of the CPRS.

摘要

5名经验丰富的评估者对28名抑郁症患者和22名精神病患者进行了检查。使用CPRS（德语初步译本）和AMP系统记录症状。从评估者的角度并运用描述性统计方法对这两种评定量表进行了比较。
大量CPRS症状与AMP症状呈现显著相关性，这表明两种评定量表之间存在很强的相似性。
与CPRS相比，AMP系统能更清晰地区分和全面呈现精神病理学情况。
在我们看来，CPRS似乎易于交流，这主要归功于对量表步骤的精确描述以及对报告项目和观察项目的区分。
为了测量治疗期间的变化，应使用半步来提高CPRS的敏感性。