Suppr超能文献

SF-36健康量表评分及统计分析方法比较:医疗结果研究结果总结

Comparison of methods for the scoring and statistical analysis of SF-36 health profile and summary measures: summary of results from the Medical Outcomes Study.

作者信息

Ware J E, Kosinski M, Bayliss M S, McHorney C A, Rogers W H, Raczek A

机构信息

Health Institute, New England Medical Center, Boston, MA, USA.

出版信息

Med Care. 1995 Apr;33(4 Suppl):AS264-79.

PMID:7723455
Abstract

Physical component summary (PCS) and mental component summary (MCS) measures make it possible to reduce the number of statistical comparisons and thereby the role of chance in testing hypotheses about health outcomes. To test their usefulness relative to a profile of eight scores, results were compared across 16 tests involving patients (N = 1,440) participating in the Medical Outcomes Study. Comparisons were made between groups known to differ at a point in time or to change over time in terms of age, diagnosis, severity of disease, comorbid conditions, acute symptoms, self-reported changes in health, and recovery from clinical depression. The relative validity (RV) of each measure was estimated by a comparison of statistical results with those for the best scales in the same tests. Differences in RV among scales from the Medical Outcomes Study 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36) were consistent with those in previous studies. One or both of the summary measures were significant for 14 of 15 differences detected in multivariate analyses of profiles and detected differences missed by the profile in one test. Relative validity coefficients ranged from .20 to .94 (median, .79) for PCS in tests involving physical criteria and from .93 to 1.45 (median, 1.02) for MCS in tests involving mental criteria. The MCS was superior to the best SF-36 scale in three of four tests involving mental health. Results suggest that the two summary measures may be useful in most studies and that their empiric validity, relative to the best SF-36 scale, will depend on the application. Surveys offering the option of analyzing both a profile and psychometrically based summary measures have an advantage over those that do not.

摘要

身体成分总结(PCS)和心理成分总结(MCS)指标使得减少统计比较的数量成为可能,从而降低了机遇在检验关于健康结果的假设中的作用。为了检验它们相对于八项得分概况的有用性,对参与医学结果研究的1440名患者进行的16项测试结果进行了比较。比较了在年龄、诊断、疾病严重程度、共病情况、急性症状、自我报告的健康变化以及临床抑郁症康复方面在某个时间点已知存在差异或随时间变化的组。通过将统计结果与同一测试中最佳量表的结果进行比较,估计了每个指标的相对效度(RV)。医学结果研究36项简短健康调查(SF - 36)各量表之间的RV差异与先前研究一致。在概况的多变量分析中检测到的15个差异中的14个,一项或两项总结指标具有显著性,并且在一项测试中概况遗漏了检测到的差异。在涉及身体标准的测试中,PCS的相对效度系数范围为0.20至0.94(中位数为0.79),在涉及心理标准的测试中,MCS的相对效度系数范围为0.93至1.45(中位数为1.02)。在涉及心理健康的四项测试中的三项中,MCS优于最佳的SF - 36量表。结果表明,这两项总结指标在大多数研究中可能有用,并且相对于最佳的SF - 36量表,它们的实证效度将取决于应用。提供分析概况和基于心理测量的总结指标选项的调查比不提供该选项的调查具有优势。

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