Psychometric and clinical tests of validity of the Japanese SF-36 Health Survey
Psychometric and clinical tests of validity of the Japanese SF-36 Health Survey
复制标题
DOI：
10.1016/s0895-4356(98)00096-1
复制
发表时间：
1998-11-01
影响因子：
7.2
通讯作者：
Gandek, B
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Fukuhara, S;Ware, JE;Gandek, B
对日本一般人群代表性样本的横断面数据进行分析，以检验日本SF-36健康调查量表作为身心健康指标的有效性。从心理测量和临床测试的有效性进行了比较。主成分分析被用来测试假设的身体和心理健康的尺寸和规模与这些组件的相关性的模式。为了测试SF-36量表评分的临床有效性，使用慢性疾病的自我报告和Zung抑郁自评量表来创建身体和精神状况严重程度不同的互斥组。SF-36量表和两个经验得出的组成部分之间的相关性模式通常证实了大多数量表的假设。心理测量和临床测试的有效性的结果是在协议的身体功能，角色，身体，活力，社会功能和心理健康量表。心理测量和临床测试的有效性之间的协议相对较少，观察身体疼痛，一般健康，和角色情感量表，这些量表的身体和心理健康因素的内容是不符合假设。在临床有效性测试中，一般健康、身体疼痛和身体功能量表是区分有和没有严重身体状况的组的最有效量表。在成分分析中与心理健康相关性最高的量表（心理健康和活力）在区分有抑郁症和无抑郁症的群体方面也最有效。本研究的结果为所有SF-36量表提供了初步解释指南，但在日本进行进一步研究之前，建议谨慎解释角色-情感、身体疼痛和一般健康量表。(C)1998年爱思唯尔科学公司
Cross-sectional data from a representative sample of the general population in Japan were analyzed to test the validity of Japanese SF-36 Health Survey scales as measures of physical and mental health. Results from psychometric and clinical tests of validity were compared. Principal components analyses were used to test for the hypothesized physical and mental dimensions of health and the pattern of scale correlations with those components. To test the clinical validity of SF-36 scale scores, self-reports of chronic medical conditions and the Zung Self-Rating Depression Scale were used to create mutually exclusive groups differing in the severity of physical and mental conditions. The pattern of correlations between the SF-36 scales and the two empirically derived components generally confirmed hypotheses for most scales. Results of psychometric and clinical tests of validity were in agreement for the Physical Functioning, Role-Physical, Vitality, Social Functioning, and Mental Health scales. Relatively less agreement between psychometric and clinical tests of validity was observed for the Bodily Pain, General Health, and Role-Emotional scales, and the physical and mental health factor content of those scales was not consistent with hypotheses. In clinical tests of validity, the General Health, Bodily Pain, and Physical Functioning scales were the most valid scales in discriminating between groups with and without a severe physical condition. Scales that correlated highest with mental health in the components analysis (Mental Health and Vitality) also were most valid in discriminating between groups with and without depression. The results of this study provide preliminary interpretation guidelines for all SF-36 scales, although caution is recommended in the interpretation of the Role-Emotional, Bodily Pain, and General Health scales pending further studies in Japan. (C) 1998 Elsevier Science Inc.