Watson C G, Plemel D, DeMotts J, Howard M T, Tuorila J, Moog R, Thomas D, Anderson D
Research Service, Department of Veterans Affairs Medical Center, St. Cloud, Minnesota.
J Trauma Stress. 1994 Jan;7(1):75-82. doi: 10.1007/BF02111913.
We compared the convergent validities of four commonly used post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) measures in 80 help-seeking Vietnam veterans by contrasting their intercorrelations. When scored as continuous severity or frequency measures, the Mississippi Scale for Combat-related PTSD's and the Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder Interview's (PTSD-I's) concordances with other measures were similar to one anothers' and generally larger than those of either the Diagnostic Interview Schedule (DIS) PTSD module or the MMPI PTSD scale. However, when used only to identify stress disorder's presence or absence, the four techniques' concordances were nearly identical. This suggested that the four measures have similar convergent validities when used simply to identify PTSD, but that the PTSD-I and Mississippi scale offer better convergent validity than the MMPI or DIS instruments when used as severity measures.
我们通过对比80名寻求帮助的越南退伍军人中四种常用创伤后应激障碍（PTSD）测量方法的相互关系，比较了它们的收敛效度。当作为连续严重程度或频率测量进行评分时，与战斗相关的PTSD的密西西比量表和创伤后应激障碍访谈（PTSD-I）与其他测量方法的一致性彼此相似，并且通常大于诊断访谈表（DIS）PTSD模块或MMPI PTSD量表。然而，当仅用于识别应激障碍的存在与否时，这四种技术的一致性几乎相同。这表明，当仅用于识别PTSD时，这四种测量方法具有相似的收敛效度，但当用作严重程度测量时，PTSD-I和密西西比量表比MMPI或DIS工具具有更好的收敛效度。
