精神病症状访谈量表翻译的信度和效度的系统评价

H. Assudani, O. Mason
{"title":"精神病症状访谈量表翻译的信度和效度的系统评价","authors":"H. Assudani, O. Mason","doi":"10.2174/1573400512666160620094320","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"BACKGROUND: Semi/Structured interview measures of psychotic symptoms are often translated for use in non-English speaking populations. These vary widely in quality and reported psychometric properties. OBJECTIVE: The evidence for the reliability and validity of translated measures is systematically reviewed using identified quality criteria. METHOD: Studies were identified through systematic searches of PsychINFO, Medline, Embase with follow-up manual searches. Only studies published in English were included. RESULTS: Twenty three studies utilising 11 different semi/structured interview measures were identified. Ten studies reported adequate psychometric properties of the translated measures. Nine had mixed reports and 4 reported poor psychometric properties. European languages (Italian, Spanish, German and French) are well represented, together with reasonable availability for Japanese and Chinese (Mandarin and Cantonese). CONCLUSION: This review highlighted a large gap in published research of translated measures for psychosis—though this is a rapidly changing field. Many cultures and languages are omitted (particularly non-European), or may face difficulties with semantic equivalence.","PeriodicalId":51774,"journal":{"name":"Current Psychiatry Reviews","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Systematic review of the reliability and validity of translated interview measures of psychotic symptoms\",\"authors\":\"H. Assudani, O. Mason\",\"doi\":\"10.2174/1573400512666160620094320\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"BACKGROUND: Semi/Structured interview measures of psychotic symptoms are often translated for use in non-English speaking populations. These vary widely in quality and reported psychometric properties. OBJECTIVE: The evidence for the reliability and validity of translated measures is systematically reviewed using identified quality criteria. METHOD: Studies were identified through systematic searches of PsychINFO, Medline, Embase with follow-up manual searches. Only studies published in English were included. RESULTS: Twenty three studies utilising 11 different semi/structured interview measures were identified. Ten studies reported adequate psychometric properties of the translated measures. Nine had mixed reports and 4 reported poor psychometric properties. European languages (Italian, Spanish, German and French) are well represented, together with reasonable availability for Japanese and Chinese (Mandarin and Cantonese). CONCLUSION: This review highlighted a large gap in published research of translated measures for psychosis—though this is a rapidly changing field. Many cultures and languages are omitted (particularly non-European), or may face difficulties with semantic equivalence.\",\"PeriodicalId\":51774,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Current Psychiatry Reviews\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2016-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Current Psychiatry Reviews\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2174/1573400512666160620094320\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Current Psychiatry Reviews","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2174/1573400512666160620094320","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:精神病症状的半/结构化访谈测量常被翻译用于非英语人群。它们在质量和报告的心理测量特性方面差别很大。目的:证据的可靠性和有效性的翻译措施是系统地审查使用确定的质量标准。方法:通过系统检索PsychINFO、Medline、Embase并进行后续人工检索,对研究进行鉴定。仅纳入以英文发表的研究。结果:采用11种不同的半/结构化访谈方法确定了23项研究。10项研究报告了翻译后的测量方法具有足够的心理测量特性。9例报告好坏参半,4例报告心理测量特性差。欧洲语言(意大利语、西班牙语、德语和法语)都很有代表性,日语和中文(普通话和广东话)也有一定的可用性。结论:虽然这是一个快速变化的领域,但这篇综述强调了已发表的精神病翻译测量研究的巨大差距。许多文化和语言被省略(特别是非欧洲),或者可能面临语义等价的困难。
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
Systematic review of the reliability and validity of translated interview measures of psychotic symptoms
BACKGROUND: Semi/Structured interview measures of psychotic symptoms are often translated for use in non-English speaking populations. These vary widely in quality and reported psychometric properties. OBJECTIVE: The evidence for the reliability and validity of translated measures is systematically reviewed using identified quality criteria. METHOD: Studies were identified through systematic searches of PsychINFO, Medline, Embase with follow-up manual searches. Only studies published in English were included. RESULTS: Twenty three studies utilising 11 different semi/structured interview measures were identified. Ten studies reported adequate psychometric properties of the translated measures. Nine had mixed reports and 4 reported poor psychometric properties. European languages (Italian, Spanish, German and French) are well represented, together with reasonable availability for Japanese and Chinese (Mandarin and Cantonese). CONCLUSION: This review highlighted a large gap in published research of translated measures for psychosis—though this is a rapidly changing field. Many cultures and languages are omitted (particularly non-European), or may face difficulties with semantic equivalence.
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: Current Psychiatry Reviews publishes frontier reviews on all the latest advances on clinical psychiatry and its related areas e.g. pharmacology, epidemiology, clinical care, and therapy. The journal’s aim is to publish the highest quality review articles dedicated to clinical research in the field. The journal is essential reading for all clinicians, psychiatrists and researchers in psychiatry.
期刊最新文献
Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation for the Treatment of Depressive Disorders: A Review of Clinical Applications Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation in Psychiatric Disorders Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation for Treatment of Auditory Hallucination: A Systematic Review of Clinical Efficacy Cognition is a Necessary Factor for Controlling Drug Abuse Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation in Psychiatric Disorders: A Comprehensive Review of Recent Advances
×
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