...
首页> 外文期刊>Psychological assessment >Convergence of scores on the interview and questionnaire versions of the Eating Disorder Examination: a meta-analytic review.
【24h】

Convergence of scores on the interview and questionnaire versions of the Eating Disorder Examination: a meta-analytic review.

机译:饮食失调考试的访谈和问卷版本的分数趋同:一项荟萃分析。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例

摘要

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.
机译:在基于访谈和问卷的精神病理学评估之间发现了显着差异。但是,这些研究通常将具有不匹配项目内容的仪器进行了比较。饮食失调考试(EDE),结构化访谈和EDE问卷版本(EDE-Q)被认为是对饮食失调症状的出色评估,并为检验基于访谈和问卷的工具的一致性提供了独特的机会具有匹配的项目内容。先前已经检查了EDE和EDE-Q分数的收敛性;但是,过去的研究受到样本量较小的限制,并且没有比较各个诊断组的评分收敛性。进行了16项研究的荟萃分析,以比较研究和诊断组之间EDE和EDE-Q得分的收敛性。关于EDE和EDE-Q子量表得分,整体相关系数的影响范围为0.68至0.76。 Cohen的整体d效应大小在0.31至.62之间,参与者在问卷中的得分始终较高。对于测量行为频率的项目,暴饮暴食的整体相关系数影响大小范围为.37至.55,对于补偿行为,整体相关系数影响大小范围为.90至.92。 Cohen的整体d效应大小介于-0.16至-0.22之间,在70%的研究中,参与者在访谈中报告的暴饮暴食比问卷中的暴饮暴食。这些结果表明,访谈和问卷调查可以评估相似的结构,但不能互换使用。需要进行进一步的研究以检查这两种仪器的暴食频率得分之间的不一致。

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