Edson R, Lavori P, Tracy K, Adler L A, Rotrosen J
Veterans Affairs Palo Alto Health Care System, Cooperative Studies Program Coordinating Center, CA, USA.
Psychopharmacol Bull. 1997;33(1):59-67.
The primary goal of Veterans Affairs (VA) Cooperative Study (CS) #394 is to determine if vitamin E is a safe and efficacious treatment for tardive dyskinesia (TD). The study uses various instruments to assess subjects for movement disorders (Abnormal Involuntary Movement Scale [AIMS], and Barnes Akathisia Scale [BAS]), psychopathology (Anchored Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale [BPRS]), and level of functioning (Global Assessment of Functioning scale [GAF]). Since the study involves nine sites, each with its own set of raters, it is important to establish and maintain high interrater reliability (IRR) on these instruments throughout the study and to identify raters who differ significantly from the others. To make this determination, personnel at each site assessed subjects from standardized videotapes on the AIMS, BAS, and Anchored BPRS, and rated written vignettes on the GAF. We fit these data to a two-way additive model to identify nonstandardized raters (i.e., those whose average ratings were significantly lower or higher than the others, or those whose scores, after adjusting for subject and rater effects, were highly variable). The proportion of nonstandardized raters ranged from 7 percent (Anchored BPRS) to 33 percent (AIMS). The estimated intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) indicated moderate reliability for the AIMS, BAS, and Anchored BPRS (0.73 to 0.75) and excellent agreement for the GAF (0.90). The companion article (Part I: Tracy et al. 1997, page 53 of this issue) describes the procedures used to train the raters for this study.
退伍军人事务部(VA)合作研究(CS)#394的主要目标是确定维生素E治疗迟发性运动障碍(TD)是否安全有效。该研究使用各种工具评估受试者的运动障碍(异常不自主运动量表[AIMS]和巴恩斯静坐不能量表[BAS])、精神病理学(定式简明精神病评定量表[BPRS])以及功能水平(总体功能评定量表[GAF])。由于该研究涉及九个地点,每个地点都有自己的一组评估者,因此在整个研究过程中,在这些工具上建立并保持高评分者间信度(IRR),并识别与其他评估者有显著差异的评估者非常重要。为了做出这一判断,每个地点的工作人员根据标准化录像带对受试者进行AIMS、BAS和定式BPRS评估,并对GAF的书面 vignettes进行评分。我们将这些数据拟合到一个双向加法模型中,以识别非标准化评估者(即那些平均评分显著低于或高于其他人的评估者,或者那些在调整受试者和评估者效应后分数高度可变的评估者)。非标准化评估者的比例从7%(定式BPRS)到33%(AIMS)不等。估计的组内相关系数(ICC)表明,AIMS、BAS和定式BPRS具有中等信度(0.73至0.75),GAF具有极好的一致性(0.90)。配套文章(第一部分:特雷西等人,1997年,本期第53页)描述了该研究中培训评估者所使用的程序。