测量主观结果：重新思考信度和效度。
Measuring subjective outcomes: rethinking reliability and validity.
作者信息
Elasy T A, Gaddy G
机构信息
Department of Medicine, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, Tenn, USA.
出版信息
J Gen Intern Med. 1998 Nov;13(11):757-61. doi: 10.1046/j.1525-1497.1998.00228.x.
Reliability and validity are criteria used to assess metric adequacy and are typically quantified by correlation coefficients. Reliability is described as the extent to which repeated measurements yield consistent results. Validity is described as the extent to which a measure actually measures what it purports to measure. These conceptualizations are less useful when applied to measures of subjective outcomes because they do not convey other influences that "drive" correlation coefficients. Consistency is a manifestation of a reliable instrument but does not ensure that an instrument is reliable. Establishing the validity of an instrument is a complex process that is heavily dependent on an investigator's hypothesis. Hence, validity coefficients may be more a reflection of hypothesis adequacy than of the extent to which instruments measure what they purport to measure. Appreciating how coefficients are influenced will better enable clinicians to assess the adequacy of subjective outcome measures.
信度和效度是用于评估指标充分性的标准，通常通过相关系数进行量化。信度被描述为重复测量产生一致结果的程度。效度被描述为一种测量方法实际测量其声称要测量的内容的程度。当应用于主观结果的测量时，这些概念的实用性较低，因为它们没有传达“驱动”相关系数的其他影响因素。一致性是可靠工具的一种表现，但并不能确保该工具是可靠的。确定一个工具的效度是一个复杂的过程，严重依赖于研究者的假设。因此，效度系数可能更多地反映了假设的充分性，而不是工具测量其声称要测量的内容的程度。了解系数是如何受到影响的，将更有助于临床医生评估主观结果测量的充分性。
Zotero 插件