Holroyd K A, Talbot F, Holm J E, Pingel J D, Lake A E, Saper J R
Department of Psychology, Ohio University, Athens 4570, USA.
Pain. 1996 Oct;67(2-3):259-65. doi: 10.1016/0304-3959(96)03129-6.
A multitrait-multimethod design was used to examine the convergent and discriminant validity of seven pain measures from three widely used self-report instruments designed to assess the sensory, affective and intensity dimensions of pain. The instruments were the McGill Pain Questionnaire, the Pain Perception Profile and Numerical Ratings. Three distinct factor models, each corresponding to a different hypothesis about how these pain measures are related, were tested using confirmatory factor analysis in a sample of 419 headache sufferers. A three-factor model, postulating three correlated factors defined by the three assessment instruments best explained the correlations between the pain measures. Measures of sensory, affective and intensity dimensions from the three instruments failed to exhibit convergent or discriminant validity. Rather, instrument variance obscured the pain qualities the three pain instruments were designed to assess. These findings suggest that greater attention needs to be paid to how formal characteristics of pain assessment instruments influence patients' descriptions of their pain.
采用多特质-多方法设计，以检验来自三种广泛使用的自评工具的七种疼痛测量方法的聚合效度和区分效度，这些工具旨在评估疼痛的感觉、情感和强度维度。这些工具包括麦吉尔疼痛问卷、疼痛感知概况和数字评分法。在419名头痛患者的样本中，使用验证性因素分析测试了三种不同的因素模型，每个模型对应于关于这些疼痛测量方法如何相关的不同假设。一个三因素模型假设由三种评估工具定义的三个相关因素，最能解释疼痛测量方法之间的相关性。来自这三种工具的感觉、情感和强度维度的测量方法未能表现出聚合效度或区分效度。相反，工具差异掩盖了这三种疼痛工具旨在评估的疼痛特质。这些发现表明，需要更多地关注疼痛评估工具的形式特征如何影响患者对其疼痛的描述。
