Clinician-rated measures of hair pulling: A preliminary psychometric evaluation
Clinician-rated measures of hair pulling: A preliminary psychometric evaluation
复制标题
DOI：
10.1023/a:1022160522908
复制
发表时间：
1999-06-01
影响因子：
1.6
通讯作者：
Novy, DM
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Stanley, MA;Breckenridge, JK;Novy, DM
拔毛癖（TM）的典型评估方法是采用临床医生评定的强迫症（OCD）量表。本初步研究考察了四种基于强迫症的临床评定量表（即耶鲁-布朗强迫症拔毛癖量表（YBOCS-TM）、精神病学研究所拔毛癖量表（PITS）和NIMH拔毛癖严重程度和损害量表）对TM症状的心理测量特征。在22个主要诊断为TM的个体样本中，对描述性数据、内部一致性、内部一致性和并发效度进行了评估。尽管由于样本量小，结论有限，但在基于强迫症的量表评估TM症状学方面，发现了混合的心理测量证据。对于所有的pit项目，以及YBOCS-TM行为子量表的项目和总结分数，评判员之间的一致性总体上是可以接受的。然而，在所有四种临床评定量表中，内部一致性的估计值低于最低可接受水平。量表效度的检验是有限的，因为在信度方面存在一些困难，尽管数据表明，一些项目和总结分数与基于拔毛自我监测的外部标准之间的一致是潜在的支持。尽管由于样本量小而受到限制，但这些数据为TM的临床评估提供了有用的初步信息，对未来研究的意义，尤其是开发新的TM量表，进行了讨论。
Trichotillomania (TM) typically is assessed using adaptations of clinician-rated scales for obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD). The present preliminary study examined the psychometric properties of four OCD-based clinician-rated scales [i.e., the Yale-Brown Obsessive Compulsive Scale-Trichotillomania (YBOCS-TM), the Psychiatric Institute Trichotillomania Scale (PITS), and the NIMH Trichotillomania Severity and Impairment Scales] of TM symptoms. Descriptive data, interrater agreement, internal consistency, and concurrent validity were evaluated in a sample of 22 individuals with a principal diagnosis of TM Mixed psychometric evidence was found regarding the utility of OCD-based scales for assessing TM symptomatology, although conclusions are limited based on small sample sizes. Interrater agreement generally was acceptable for all PITS items and for both item and summary scores for the YBOCS-TM Behavior Subscale. Fbr all four clinician-rated scales, however, estimates of internal consistency were below minimally acceptable levels. Examination of scale validity was limited given some difficulties with reliability, although data suggested potential support for concurrent agreement between some item and summary scores with external criteria based on self-monitoring of hair pulling. Despite limitations due to the small sample size, the data provide useful preliminary information about the clinical evaluation of TM Implications for future research, most notably development of new TM scales, are discussed.