中国全科医学 ›› 2023, Vol. 26 ›› Issue (23): 2907-2911.DOI: 10.12114/j.issn.1007-9572.2022.0739

所属专题: 精神卫生最新文章合集

• 论著·精神心理健康研究 • 上一篇    下一篇

认知性访谈在精神分裂症患者求助动机量表编制中的应用

马锐1, 王宇2, 李玉鑫1, 王正君1, 周郁秋1,*()   

  1. 1.150081 黑龙江省哈尔滨市,哈尔滨医科大学护理学院
    2.451460 河南省郑州市,阜外华中心血管病医院护理部
  • 收稿日期:2022-08-23 修回日期:2022-12-08 出版日期:2023-08-15 发布日期:2022-12-22
  • 通讯作者: 周郁秋

  • 作者贡献:马锐和王宇负责研究设计,收集数据,进行结果分析、解释及撰写初稿;李玉鑫、王正君负责数据整理、录入及论文修订;周郁秋负责文章的质量控制及审校,对文章整体负责。
  • 基金资助:
    国家自然科学基金资助项目(72074063); 黑龙江省省属高等学校基本科研业务费基础研究项目(JFQN202103)

Application of Cognitive Interviewing in the Development of a Help-seeking Motivation Scale for Patients with Schizophrenia

MA Rui1, WANG Yu2, LI Yuxin1, WANG Zhengjun1, ZHOU Yuqiu1,*()   

  1. 1. School of Nursing, Harbin Medical University, Harbin 150081, China
    2. Department of Nursing, Fuwai Central China Cardiovascular Hospital, Zhengzhou 451460, China
  • Received:2022-08-23 Revised:2022-12-08 Published:2023-08-15 Online:2022-12-22
  • Contact: ZHOU Yuqiu

摘要: 背景 量表编制过程中,编制者与目标人群对条目可能存在理解偏差,从而影响数据收集的准确性。 目的 应用认知性访谈对精神分裂症患者求助动机量表条目进行调整。 方法 2021年12月—2022年1月,通过目的抽样法选取就诊于大庆市精神专科医院的30例患者进行3轮认知性访谈,收集访谈资料。结合问题评估系统(QAS-99)编码结果及经专家小组意见对量表条目进行修改。 结果 第1轮访谈,受访者对11个条目提出疑义,有3个条目与"措辞"相关,有7个条目与"模糊"相关,有2个条目与"知识"相关,1个条目与"回忆困难"相关,经讨论后部分条目进行了修改;第2轮访谈,受访者认为1个条目假设不恰当,经讨论后进行修改;第3轮访谈,受访者认为无条目需要修改,访谈停止。 结论 认知性访谈能够有效解决精神分裂症求助动机量表编制过程中的编制者与患者之间的理解差异问题,从而提高了量表的准确性与适用性。

关键词: 动机性访谈, 精神分裂症, 小组访谈, 求助行为, 行为评定量表

Abstract:

Background

The accuracy of data collection can be affected by bias in the understanding of the items between the developer and the target population during scale development.

Objective

To adjust the items of the Schizophrenia Help-seeking Motivation Scale using the cognitive interview.

Methods

A purposive sampling method was used to select 30 schizophrenia patients from a psychiatric hospital in Daqing City from December 2021 to January 2022 to attend three rounds of cognitive interviews. The interview data were collected, and coded using the Question Appraisal System (QAS-99) , and after the coding results were collated, the scale entries were adjusted by integrating respondent feedback and expert panel comments.

Results

During the 1st round of interview, interviewees raised doubts on 11 entries, among which three were due to wording, seven were due to vague expressions, two were due to lack of inadequate knowledge, and one was due to the difficulty in recalling. And some of the entries were revised after discussion. The results of the 2nd round of interview showed that one entry was assumed to be inappropriate and was revised after discussion. The 3rd round of interview continued until the interviewees were able to understand the entries correctly, and they thought that there was no need to further revise the entries.

Conclusion

The cognitive interview effectively solved the problem of understanding differences between the developer and schizophrenia patients in the development of the Schizophrenia Help-seeking Motivation Scale, thus improving the accuracy and applicability of the scale.

Key words: Motivational interviewing, Schizophrenia, Group interviews, Help-seeking behavior, Behavior rating scale