首页> 外文期刊>Archives of medical research >A comparison of three rating scales for measuring subjective phenomena in clinical research. II. Use of experimentally controlled visual stimuli.
【24h】

A comparison of three rating scales for measuring subjective phenomena in clinical research. II. Use of experimentally controlled visual stimuli.

机译:用于衡量临床研究中主观现象的三种等级量表的比较。二。使用实验控制的视觉刺激。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

BACKGROUND: In a previous study of three types of global scales we found that verbal rating scales were particularly reliable for rating auditory stimuli. We now wanted to check the performance of the scales for rating experimentally controlled visual stimuli. METHODS: We used a prospective, experimentally controlled, clinimetric study, which was conducted at the Department of Psychiatry of the Autonomous University of Puebla Medical School in the state capital city of Puebla, Mexico. A total of 20 fifth-year medical students participated in the study. Visual stimuli consisted of 15 cards with five different intensities on the gray-to-black scale, administered randomly in three sessions to each subject. With regard to main outcome measurement, validity and consistency indices were determined for visual analog scale (VAS), numerical rating score (NRS), and verbal rating scale (VRS) to rate visual stimuli. RESULTS: For validity, correlation coefficients between scales and reference standard were high, especially in VRS (r=0.902). For consistency, VRS had highest kappa value (k(w)=0.71) for interobserver variability. CONCLUSIONS: Three instruments could be hierarchically ranked for their indices of validity and consistency. Being more consistent than VAS and NRS, VRS merits more frequent usage in clinical research.
机译:背景:在对三种全球量表的先前研究中,我们发现口头评定量表对于评定听觉刺激特别可靠。现在,我们要检查量表的性能,以对实验控制的视觉刺激进行评分。方法:我们使用了一项前瞻性,实验控制的斜度研究,该研究是在墨西哥州首府普埃布拉的普埃布拉自治大学医学院精神病学系进行的。共有20名五年级医学生参加了这项研究。视觉刺激由15张卡片组成,每张卡片在灰色到黑色范围内具有五种不同的强度,并在三个疗程中随机分配给每个受试者。关于主要结局测量,确定视觉模拟量表(VAS),数字评分(NRS)和口头评分量表(VRS)的有效性和一致性指标,以对视觉刺激进行评分。结果:为验证有效性,量表与参考标准之间的相关系数较高,尤其是在VRS中(r = 0.902)。为了一致性,VRS具有最高kappa值(k(w)= 0.71),以实现观察者之间的差异。结论:三种工具可以根据其有效性和一致性指标进行分级排名。与VAS和NRS相比,VRS具有更好的一致性,值得在临床研究中更频繁地使用。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号