Convergence of Scores on the Interview and Questionnaire Versions of the Eating Disorder Examination: A Meta-Analytic Review
Convergence of Scores on the Interview and Questionnaire Versions of the Eating Disorder Examination: A Meta-Analytic Review
复制标题
DOI：
10.1037/a0023246
复制
发表时间：
2011-09-01
影响因子：
3.6
通讯作者：
Crow, Scott J.
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Berg, Kelly C.;Peterson, Carol B.;Crow, Scott J.
显着的差异已经被发现之间的访谈和基于问卷的精神病理学评估，然而，这些研究通常比较工具与不匹配的项目内容。进食障碍检查（EDE），结构化访谈，和问卷版本的EDE（EDE-Q）被认为是卓越的评估进食障碍症状，并提供了一个独特的机会，检查的一致性，访谈和问卷为基础的工具与匹配的项目内容。之前已经检查了EDE和EDE-Q评分的收敛性;然而，过去的研究受到样本量小的限制，并且没有比较诊断组之间评分的收敛性。对16项研究进行了荟萃分析，以比较研究和诊断组之间EDE和EDE-Q评分的收敛性。关于EDE和EDE-Q子量表评分，总体相关系数效应量范围为0.68至0.76。总体科恩的d效应大小范围从0.31到0.62，参与者在问卷中的得分一直较高。对于测量行为频率的项目，暴饮暴食的总体相关系数效应量范围为0.37至0.55，代偿行为的总体相关系数效应量范围为0.90至0.92。总体科恩d效应量范围为-0.16至-0.22，在70%的研究中，参与者在访谈中报告的暴饮暴食比问卷调查中更多。这些结果表明，访谈和问卷评估类似的结构，但不应该互换使用。需要进一步的研究来检查两种仪器上狂欢频率评分之间的不一致性。
Significant discrepancies have been found between interview-and questionnaire-based assessments of psychopathology; however, these studies have typically compared instruments with unmatched item content. The Eating Disorder Examination (EDE), a structured interview, and the questionnaire version of the EDE (EDE-Q) are considered the preeminent assessments of eating disorder symptoms and provide a unique opportunity to examine the concordance of interview-and questionnaire-based instruments with matched item content. The convergence of EDE and EDE-Q scores has been examined previously; however, past studies have been limited by small sample sizes and have not compared the convergence of scores across diagnostic groups. A meta-analysis of 16 studies was conducted to compare the convergence of EDE and EDE-Q scores across studies and diagnostic groups. With regard to the EDE and EDE-Q subscale scores, the overall correlation coefficient effect sizes ranged from .68 to .76. The overall Cohen's d effect sizes ranged from .31 to .62, with participants consistently scoring higher on the questionnaire. For the items measuring behavior frequency, the overall correlation coefficient effect sizes ranged from .37 to .55 for binge eating and .90 to .92 for compensatory behaviors. The overall Cohen's d effect sizes ranged from -0.16 to -0.22, with participants reporting more binge eating on the interview than in the questionnaire in 70% of the studies. These results suggest the interview and questionnaire assess similar constructs but should not be used interchangeably. Additional research is needed to examine the inconsistencies between binge frequency scores on the 2 instruments.