意大利版达沃斯认知偏差评估量表(DACOBS)在精神分裂症谱系障碍患者和健康对照样本中的验证

IF 1 4区 医学 Q4 PSYCHIATRY Rivista di psichiatria Pub Date : 2022-01-01 DOI:10.1708/3814.37991
Valentina Pugliese, M. Aloi, D. Maestri, R. de Filippis, R. Gaetano, L. Pelizza, C. Segura-García, P. De Fazio
{"title":"意大利版达沃斯认知偏差评估量表(DACOBS)在精神分裂症谱系障碍患者和健康对照样本中的验证","authors":"Valentina Pugliese, M. Aloi, D. Maestri, R. de Filippis, R. Gaetano, L. Pelizza, C. Segura-García, P. De Fazio","doi":"10.1708/3814.37991","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"PURPOSE Recently two instruments were developed to address the study of the cognitive biases in schizophrenia spectrum disorders (SSD): the Cognitive Biases Questionnaire for Psychosis (CBQ-P) and the Davos Assessment of Cognitive Biases Scale (DACOBS). Aim of this study was to validate the Italian version of the DACOBS. METHODS We investigated factor structure, reliability, discriminative and convergent validity of the instrument by comparing to the CBQ-P in an Italian sample of 102 patients diagnosed with SSD and 330 healthy controls (HC), matched by age, education and gender. RESULTS The second-order seven-factor solution provided the best results among the four models tested. Reliability proved to be very satisfactory, with ω coefficient ranged from 0.75 for Jumping to conclusions to 0.89 for Safety Behavior. The Italian version of DACOBS could discriminate psychosis from HC (Wilks' Lambda=0.64, F=34.284, p<0.001; h2=0.364). All seven DACOBS subscales were significantly correlated with the CBQ-P subscales (total sample: r=0.331-0.707; SSD group: r=0.424-0.735; HC group: r=0.177-0.460). CONCLUSIONS The Italian version of DACOBS is a valid instrument for measuring cognitive biases for patients with psychosis, confirming previous results regarding the psychometric properties of the tool.","PeriodicalId":21506,"journal":{"name":"Rivista di psichiatria","volume":"57 3 1","pages":"127-133"},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Validation of the Italian version of the Davos Assessment of Cognitive Biases Scale (DACOBS) in a sample of schizophrenia spectrum disorder patients and healthy controls.\",\"authors\":\"Valentina Pugliese, M. Aloi, D. Maestri, R. de Filippis, R. Gaetano, L. Pelizza, C. Segura-García, P. De Fazio\",\"doi\":\"10.1708/3814.37991\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"PURPOSE Recently two instruments were developed to address the study of the cognitive biases in schizophrenia spectrum disorders (SSD): the Cognitive Biases Questionnaire for Psychosis (CBQ-P) and the Davos Assessment of Cognitive Biases Scale (DACOBS). Aim of this study was to validate the Italian version of the DACOBS. METHODS We investigated factor structure, reliability, discriminative and convergent validity of the instrument by comparing to the CBQ-P in an Italian sample of 102 patients diagnosed with SSD and 330 healthy controls (HC), matched by age, education and gender. RESULTS The second-order seven-factor solution provided the best results among the four models tested. Reliability proved to be very satisfactory, with ω coefficient ranged from 0.75 for Jumping to conclusions to 0.89 for Safety Behavior. The Italian version of DACOBS could discriminate psychosis from HC (Wilks' Lambda=0.64, F=34.284, p<0.001; h2=0.364). All seven DACOBS subscales were significantly correlated with the CBQ-P subscales (total sample: r=0.331-0.707; SSD group: r=0.424-0.735; HC group: r=0.177-0.460). CONCLUSIONS The Italian version of DACOBS is a valid instrument for measuring cognitive biases for patients with psychosis, confirming previous results regarding the psychometric properties of the tool.\",\"PeriodicalId\":21506,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Rivista di psichiatria\",\"volume\":\"57 3 1\",\"pages\":\"127-133\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Rivista di psichiatria\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1708/3814.37991\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHIATRY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Rivista di psichiatria","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1708/3814.37991","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

目的:近年来,研究人员开发了两种工具来解决精神分裂症谱系障碍(SSD)的认知偏差研究:精神病认知偏差问卷(CBQ-P)和达沃斯认知偏差评估量表(DACOBS)。本研究的目的是验证意大利版的DACOBS。方法通过与意大利102例SSD患者和330例健康对照(HC)的CBQ-P量表进行比较,考察该量表的因素结构、信度、判别效度和收敛效度。结果在4个模型中,二阶七因子解决方案的效果最好。可靠性被证明是非常令人满意的,ω系数范围从0.75跳到结论到0.89的安全行为。意大利版DACOBS可以区分精神病和HC (Wilks’Lambda=0.64, F=34.284, p<0.001;h2 = 0.364)。所有七个DACOBS子量表与CBQ-P子量表均显著相关(总样本:r=0.331-0.707;SSD组:r=0.424-0.735;HC组:r=0.177-0.460)。结论意大利语版DACOBS是一种有效的测量精神病患者认知偏差的工具,证实了之前关于该工具心理测量特性的结果。
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
Validation of the Italian version of the Davos Assessment of Cognitive Biases Scale (DACOBS) in a sample of schizophrenia spectrum disorder patients and healthy controls.
PURPOSE Recently two instruments were developed to address the study of the cognitive biases in schizophrenia spectrum disorders (SSD): the Cognitive Biases Questionnaire for Psychosis (CBQ-P) and the Davos Assessment of Cognitive Biases Scale (DACOBS). Aim of this study was to validate the Italian version of the DACOBS. METHODS We investigated factor structure, reliability, discriminative and convergent validity of the instrument by comparing to the CBQ-P in an Italian sample of 102 patients diagnosed with SSD and 330 healthy controls (HC), matched by age, education and gender. RESULTS The second-order seven-factor solution provided the best results among the four models tested. Reliability proved to be very satisfactory, with ω coefficient ranged from 0.75 for Jumping to conclusions to 0.89 for Safety Behavior. The Italian version of DACOBS could discriminate psychosis from HC (Wilks' Lambda=0.64, F=34.284, p<0.001; h2=0.364). All seven DACOBS subscales were significantly correlated with the CBQ-P subscales (total sample: r=0.331-0.707; SSD group: r=0.424-0.735; HC group: r=0.177-0.460). CONCLUSIONS The Italian version of DACOBS is a valid instrument for measuring cognitive biases for patients with psychosis, confirming previous results regarding the psychometric properties of the tool.
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
Rivista di psichiatria
Rivista di psichiatria 医学-精神病学
CiteScore
5.00
自引率
3.70%
发文量
31
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Gli interessi della rivista riguardano l’approfondimento delle interazioni tra mente e malattia, la validazione e la discussione dei nuovi strumenti e parametri di classificazione diagnostica, la verifica delle prospettive terapeutiche farmacologiche e non.
期刊最新文献
Italian Guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorders. Italian Guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorders: structural abnormalities Italian Guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorders: multimodal approaches of treatment and intervention. Italian Guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorders: clinical hallmarks. Italian Guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorders: international diagnostic criteria - differences and similarities.
×
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