动态支持数据库临床支持工具:量表间可靠性

Faye Bohen, Ceri Woodrow
{"title":"动态支持数据库临床支持工具:量表间可靠性","authors":"Faye Bohen, Ceri Woodrow","doi":"10.1108/amhid-09-2019-0027","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The dynamic support database (DSD) clinical support tool structures the risk of admission rating for individuals with intellectual disabilities. This study aims to investigate inter-rater reliability between multi-disciplinary health care professionals within the North West of England.,A small-scale quantitative study investigated reliability between raters on the DSD clinical support tool. A data set of 60 rating tools for 30 individuals was used. Descriptive statistics and Kappa coefficient explored agreement.,The DSD clinical support tool was found to have strong inter-rater reliability between individual items and the differences between individual scores were spread suggesting variance found could not be attributed to specific questions. Strong inter-rater reliability was found in the overall ratings.,Results suggest the DSD clinical support tool provides stratification for risk of admission ratings independent of who completes it. Future studies could investigate inter-rater reliability between organisations, i.e. health and social care professionals, and use a larger data sample to ensure generalisability. Replication of the study within child and adolescent services using the children’s DSD clinical support tool is also recommended.,The DSD clinical support tool has been implemented within the child and adult intellectual disability services across the North West. As more teams across England consider its implementation, the study provides reassurance that coding agreement is high, allowing for stratification for risk of admission independent of the rater.","PeriodicalId":44693,"journal":{"name":"Advances in Mental Health and Intellectual Disabilities","volume":"14 1","pages":"25-32"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2020-02-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1108/amhid-09-2019-0027","citationCount":"4","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Dynamic support database clinical support tool: inter-rater reliability\",\"authors\":\"Faye Bohen, Ceri Woodrow\",\"doi\":\"10.1108/amhid-09-2019-0027\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The dynamic support database (DSD) clinical support tool structures the risk of admission rating for individuals with intellectual disabilities. This study aims to investigate inter-rater reliability between multi-disciplinary health care professionals within the North West of England.,A small-scale quantitative study investigated reliability between raters on the DSD clinical support tool. A data set of 60 rating tools for 30 individuals was used. Descriptive statistics and Kappa coefficient explored agreement.,The DSD clinical support tool was found to have strong inter-rater reliability between individual items and the differences between individual scores were spread suggesting variance found could not be attributed to specific questions. Strong inter-rater reliability was found in the overall ratings.,Results suggest the DSD clinical support tool provides stratification for risk of admission ratings independent of who completes it. Future studies could investigate inter-rater reliability between organisations, i.e. health and social care professionals, and use a larger data sample to ensure generalisability. Replication of the study within child and adolescent services using the children’s DSD clinical support tool is also recommended.,The DSD clinical support tool has been implemented within the child and adult intellectual disability services across the North West. As more teams across England consider its implementation, the study provides reassurance that coding agreement is high, allowing for stratification for risk of admission independent of the rater.\",\"PeriodicalId\":44693,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Advances in Mental Health and Intellectual Disabilities\",\"volume\":\"14 1\",\"pages\":\"25-32\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-02-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1108/amhid-09-2019-0027\",\"citationCount\":\"4\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Advances in Mental Health and Intellectual Disabilities\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1108/amhid-09-2019-0027\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHIATRY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Advances in Mental Health and Intellectual Disabilities","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/amhid-09-2019-0027","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

摘要

动态支持数据库(dynamic support database, DSD)临床支持工具对智力障碍患者的入院风险进行分级。本研究旨在调查英格兰西北部多学科卫生保健专业人员之间的评级信度。一项小规模定量研究调查了评分者对DSD临床支持工具的可靠性。使用了30个人的60个评级工具的数据集。描述性统计和Kappa系数探讨一致性。研究发现,DSD临床支持工具在单个项目之间具有很强的评分间信度,并且个体得分之间的差异被分散,这表明所发现的差异不能归因于特定问题。在总体评分中发现了很强的评分者之间的可靠性。结果表明,DSD临床支持工具提供了入院风险分级的分层,而不依赖于谁完成了该分级。未来的研究可以调查组织之间的可靠性,即卫生和社会护理专业人员,并使用更大的数据样本,以确保普遍性。还建议在儿童和青少年服务中使用儿童DSD临床支持工具复制该研究。在整个西北地区的儿童和成人智障服务中,已经实施了DSD临床支持工具。随着英格兰越来越多的团队考虑实施,这项研究提供了保证,编码一致性很高,允许独立于评分者的入院风险分层。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Dynamic support database clinical support tool: inter-rater reliability
The dynamic support database (DSD) clinical support tool structures the risk of admission rating for individuals with intellectual disabilities. This study aims to investigate inter-rater reliability between multi-disciplinary health care professionals within the North West of England.,A small-scale quantitative study investigated reliability between raters on the DSD clinical support tool. A data set of 60 rating tools for 30 individuals was used. Descriptive statistics and Kappa coefficient explored agreement.,The DSD clinical support tool was found to have strong inter-rater reliability between individual items and the differences between individual scores were spread suggesting variance found could not be attributed to specific questions. Strong inter-rater reliability was found in the overall ratings.,Results suggest the DSD clinical support tool provides stratification for risk of admission ratings independent of who completes it. Future studies could investigate inter-rater reliability between organisations, i.e. health and social care professionals, and use a larger data sample to ensure generalisability. Replication of the study within child and adolescent services using the children’s DSD clinical support tool is also recommended.,The DSD clinical support tool has been implemented within the child and adult intellectual disability services across the North West. As more teams across England consider its implementation, the study provides reassurance that coding agreement is high, allowing for stratification for risk of admission independent of the rater.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.60
自引率
18.20%
发文量
22
期刊最新文献
Kind minds: using the ‘compassionate kitbag’ in a compassion focused therapy group for adults with intellectual disabilities To say (sexual fetish)… or not to say (sexual fetish). That is the question Assessing adherence to National Institute for Health and Care Excellence dementia assessment and diagnosis guidelines in adults with intellectual disability: a retrospective cohort study Project ECHO-AIDD: recommendations for care of adults with intellectual and developmental disabilities Forensic mental health intellectual and developmental disability service: an analysis of referral patterns and comparison with community mental health intellectual disability (MHID) services in Ireland
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1