期刊文献+

SF-36在神经症病人中应用的信度及效度研究 被引量:13

A study of the reliability and validity of the SF-36 in patients with neuroses
在线阅读 下载PDF
导出
摘要 目的 评价健康状况调查问卷(The Short-Form-36 Health Survey,SF-36)在神经症病人中的信度和效度。方法 由专业医生对53例心身科门诊及住院患者评定焦虑自评量表(self-rating anxiety scale,SAS)、抑郁自评量表(self-rating depression scale,SDS)和SF-36,4周后予以重测。对量表的内部一致性、重测信度及效标关联效度等指标进行分析。结果 SF-36的Cronbach's α系数为0.7581,各维度的Cronbach's α系数较好,重测后各项目的相关系数均在0.284~0.796之间。SF-36各维度分与SAS、SDS总分间。除躯体功能,躯体健康功能导致的角色受限,情感功能所致的角色受限外,均与SAS总分呈明显负相关,除躯体功能、躯体健康功能导致的角色受限,躯体疼痛,情感功能所致的角色受限外,SDS总分呈明显负相关。结论 SF-36具有较好的信度和效度,部分分量表能较好反映神经症病人的情绪状态,基本适用于神经症病人生活质量评价。 Objective: To assess the reliability and validity of the Short-Form-36 Health Survey (SF-36) in patients with neurosis. Methods: 53 patients with neurosis were evaluated with SAS,SDS and SF-36 by trained doctors , and these patients were rated again with SF-36 one month later. The inter-item consistency, test-retest reliability and parallel validity of SF-36 were analyzed respectively. Results: The Cronbach alpha coefficient was 0.758, it covered a good coefficient of inter-item consistency (Cronbach's αcoefficient). The coefficients of test-retest for all subscales of SF-36 were ranged from 0. 284 to 0. 796. Except physical functioning, role limitations due to physical health, role limitations due to emotional problems, the subscales of SF-36 were significantly relative with total scores of SAS, and were significantly relative with total scores of SDS except physical functioning, role limitations due to physical health, bodily pain, role limitations due to emotional problems. Conclusion: The results indicated that the Chinese version of SF-36 had relatively good reliability and validity, the subscales could reflect the mood state and other dimension of quality of life of the patients with neurosis, and could be basically applicable for life quality assessment in the patients with neurosis.
出处 《上海精神医学》 北大核心 2003年第z1期23-25,共3页 Shanghai Archives of Psychiatry
基金 上海市高等学校青年科学基金(2000QN13)
关键词 神经症 健康状况调查问卷 信度 效度 Neurosis The Short-Form-36 Health Survey (SF-36) Reliability Validity
  • 相关文献

参考文献6

  • 1盛承东,王祖承,李春波,方华.健康状况调查问卷应用于精神分裂症患者中的信度和效度[J].上海精神医学,2002,14(3):151-153. 被引量:47
  • 2张骏,何廷尉,罗德儒,刘朝杰,陈芙君,袁鸿江.SF-36评价中风患者生命质量的信度和效度[J].中国行为医学科学,2001,10(5):416-419. 被引量:60
  • 3[5]Mendlowicz MV, Stein MB. Quality of life in individuals with anxiety disorders. Am J Psychiatry, 9000, 157(5) : 669
  • 4[6]Ware JE Jr. SF-36 health survey update. Spine, 2000, 25 (24) :3130
  • 5[7]Stein MB, Barrett-Connor E. Qulity of life in older adults receiving medications for anxiety, depression, or insomnia. Am J Geriatr Psychiatry, 2002, 10(5) : 568
  • 6[8]Ware JE, Kosinski M. Interpreting SF-36 summary health measures:a response. Quality Life Research, 2001, 10(5) :405; discussion 415

二级参考文献14

  • 1肖水源.社会支持评定量表[J].中国心理卫生杂志,1993,7:42-42.
  • 2袁鸿江,老年医学,1995年,52页
  • 3肖水源,中国心理卫生杂志,1993年,7卷,增刊,42页
  • 4李凌江,杨德森,胡治平,文芳.慢性脑卒中患者生活质量评估工具的研究[J].中国行为医学科学,1997,6(1):4-7. 被引量:30
  • 5Ware JE, Sherbourne CD. The MOS 36-item short-from health survery (SF-36): Conceptual framework and item selection. Medical Care, 1992, 30: 473
  • 6范肖冬.心理卫生评定量表手册(增订版).北京:中国心理卫生杂志社,1999,77
  • 7Wang XS, Cleeland CS, Mendoza TR, et al. The effects of pain severity on health-related quality of life.: a study of Chinese cancer patients. Cancer, 1999, 86(9) : 1848
  • 8Ren XS, Chang K. Evaluating health status of elderly Chinese in Boston. J Clin Epidemiol, 1998, 51(5) : 429
  • 9Brazier JE, Harper R, Jones NMB, et al. Validating the SF-36Health Survery Questionnaire: New outcome measure for primary care. British Medical Journal, 1992, 305: 160
  • 10Ware JE. Health status and outcomes assessment tool. The Intenation Electronic Journal of Health Education, 2000, 3 : 138

共引文献98

同被引文献143

引证文献13

二级引证文献50

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部