Suppr超能文献

测量墨西哥裔美国人健康状况的陷阱:英文和西班牙文版疾病影响概况量表的比较效度

Pitfalls in measuring the health status of Mexican Americans: comparative validity of the English and Spanish Sickness Impact Profile.

作者信息

Deyo R A

出版信息

Am J Public Health. 1984 Jun;74(6):569-73. doi: 10.2105/ajph.74.6.569.

Abstract

We tested a Spanish translation of the Sickness Impact Profile (SIP) in a clinical study of low back pain, which included non-Hispanic patients (Group I), Mexican Americans who used the English SIP (Group II), and Mexican Americans who used the Spanish SIP (Group III). The reliability and clinical validity of responses by these three groups were compared. Internal consistency of responses by all three groups was excellent ( Cronbach 's alpha for the overall SIP = .93 - .95). When construct validity was tested by correlating SIP scores with several clinical measures of disease severity, however, important differences emerged. Group I responses appeared to be highly valid, while group III responses did not; Group II responses appeared reasonably valid, but intermediate between the other groups. These differences appear unlikely to be due to clinical differences, interviewing, or translational problems and seem to parallel the groups' levels of "acculturation." It may be that certain aspects of acculturation, including familiarity with questionnaire research, critically affect the validity of responses to this questionnaire.

摘要

在一项关于腰痛的临床研究中,我们对疾病影响量表(SIP)的西班牙语译本进行了测试。该研究纳入了非西班牙裔患者(第一组)、使用英文SIP的墨西哥裔美国人(第二组)以及使用西班牙文SIP的墨西哥裔美国人(第三组)。我们比较了这三组患者回答的信度和临床效度。三组患者回答的内部一致性都非常好(整个SIP的Cronbach's α系数 = 0.93 - 0.95)。然而,当通过将SIP分数与疾病严重程度的多项临床指标进行关联来测试结构效度时,出现了重要差异。第一组患者的回答似乎效度很高,而第三组患者的回答则不然;第二组患者的回答似乎效度合理,但介于其他两组之间。这些差异似乎不太可能归因于临床差异、访谈或翻译问题,而且似乎与各组的“文化适应”水平平行。可能是文化适应的某些方面,包括对问卷调查研究的熟悉程度,严重影响了对该问卷回答的效度。

相似文献

8

引用本文的文献

本文引用的文献

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验