Morrow G R, Feldstein M, Adler L M, Derogatis L R, Enelow A J, Gates C, Holland J, Melisaratos N, Murawski B J, Penman D, Schmale A, Schmitt M, Morse I
Gen Hosp Psychiatry. 1981 Jun;3(2):79-88. doi: 10.1016/0163-8343(81)90048-7.
The interrater reliability and validity of brief interview rated measures of psychosocial adjustment were examined in four sequential studies. A total of 25 videotaped interviews with cancer patients were rated by 105 social workers, nurses, physicians, and specialists in psychosocial oncology. The Rating of Psychosocial Function (RPF), Coping Adequacy Rating (CAR), and Global Adjustment to Illness Scale (GAIS) were used by various rating groups with an indication of interrater agreement. Agreement on ratings was not influenced by the length of interview (15 vs. 30 minutes) but appeared to the affected by the structure of the interview and profession of the raters. All three instruments showed a measure of matching with clinical impressions in addition to demonstrating a measure of both convergent and divergent construct validation. The GAIS was chosen as most adequately reflecting their clinical impression by a majority of raters. With a degree of training, any of the three instruments could be used to assess psychosocial adjustment with some measure of confidence in the validity of the rating.
在四项连续研究中，对心理社会适应简短访谈评分测量的评分者间信度和效度进行了检验。105名社会工作者、护士、医生和心理社会肿瘤学专家对25段癌症患者的录像访谈进行了评分。不同评分组使用了心理社会功能评定量表（RPF）、应对充分性评定量表（CAR）和疾病总体适应量表（GAIS），并给出了评分者间一致性的指标。评分的一致性不受访谈时长（15分钟与30分钟）的影响，但似乎受访谈结构和评分者专业的影响。除了表现出一定程度的聚合效度和区分效度外，所有这三种工具都显示出与临床印象的一定匹配度。大多数评分者认为GAIS最能充分反映他们的临床印象。经过一定程度的培训，这三种工具中的任何一种都可用于评估心理社会适应情况，且对评分效度有一定程度的信心。
