McHorney C A, Ware J E, Raczek A E
Health Institute, New England Medical Center, Boston, MA 02111.
Med Care. 1993 Mar;31(3):247-63. doi: 10.1097/00005650-199303000-00006.
Cross-sectional data from the Medical Outcomes Study (MOS) were analyzed to test the validity of the MOS 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36) scales as measures of physical and mental health constructs. Results from traditional psychometric and clinical tests of validity were compared. Principal components analysis was used to test for hypothesized physical and mental health dimensions. For purposes of clinical tests of validity, clinical criteria defined mutually exclusive adult patient groups differing in severity of medical and psychiatric conditions. Scales shown in the components analysis to primarily measure physical health (physical functioning and role limitations-physical) best distinguished groups differing in severity of chronic medical condition and had the most pure physical health interpretation. Scales shown to primarily measure mental health (mental health and role limitations-emotional) best distinguished groups differing in the presence and severity of psychiatric disorders and had the most pure mental health interpretation. The social functioning, vitality, and general health perceptions scales measured both physical and mental health components and, thus, had the most complex interpretation. These results are useful in establishing guidelines for the interpretation of each scale and in documenting the size of differences between clinical groups that should be considered very large.
分析了医学结果研究(MOS)的横断面数据,以检验MOS 36项简短健康调查(SF-36)量表作为身心健康结构测量指标的有效性。比较了传统心理测量和临床效度测试的结果。主成分分析用于检验假设的身心健康维度。为了进行临床效度测试,临床标准定义了在医疗和精神疾病严重程度上不同的相互排斥的成年患者组。在成分分析中显示主要测量身体健康的量表(身体功能和角色限制-身体方面)最能区分慢性疾病严重程度不同的组,并且对身体健康的解释最纯粹。显示主要测量心理健康的量表(心理健康和角色限制-情感方面)最能区分存在精神疾病及其严重程度不同的组,并且对心理健康的解释最纯粹。社会功能、活力和总体健康感知量表同时测量了身心健康成分,因此解释最为复杂。这些结果有助于建立每个量表的解释指南,并记录临床组之间应被视为非常大的差异大小。