CAJ | 학술논문

目的：比较常用量表研制质量评价的标准。方法：检索ISOQOL标准及随后纳入标准的参考文献。两名作者独立纳入满足以下条件的标准：全面评价量表研制过程的标准，已发表或未发表的标准。两名作者独立对标准进行要素提取，包括标准名称、评价量表的类型、标准目的、研制方法、内容及评价方法等。对提取要素进行定性分析，综合汇总标准中共有的要素及特点，比较分析标准中各自侧重的要素及特点。结果：纳入9个标准的研究目的是评价患者结局报告或健康相关量表/模块的研制流程完整性、测量属性质量，并根据评价结果对量表临床应用进行推荐；标准研制方法是基于既往研究的专家共识；标准内容包括了量表研制及评价的基本特征，即概念框架、目标人群、内容效度、内部一致性、重测信度、结构效度和反应度作及解释性；标准评分体系采用两分类或四级评分，或要求量表提供相关证据性文件等方法。结论：参考研究目的、试验类型、量表分类及操作模式等因素选择使用以上标准规范量表研究，进行量表评价，正确选择量表应用临床。
목적：비교상용량표연제질량평개적표준。방법：검색ISOQOL표준급수후납입표준적삼고문헌。량명작자독립납입만족이하조건적표준：전면평개량표연제과정적표준，이발표혹미발표적표준。량명작자독립대표준진행요소제취，포괄표준명칭、평개량표적류형、표준목적、연제방법、내용급평개방법등。대제취요소진행정성분석，종합회총표준중공유적요소급특점，비교분석표준중각자측중적요소급특점。결과：납입9개표준적연구목적시평개환자결국보고혹건강상관량표/모괴적연제류정완정성、측량속성질량，병근거평개결과대량표림상응용진행추천；표준연제방법시기우기왕연구적전가공식；표준내용포괄료량표연제급평개적기본특정，즉개념광가、목표인군、내용효도、내부일치성、중측신도、결구효도화반응도작급해석성；표준평분체계채용량분류혹사급평분，혹요구량표제공상관증거성문건등방법。결론：삼고연구목적、시험류형、량표분류급조작모식등인소선택사용이상표준규범량표연구，진행량표평개，정학선택량표응용림상。
This study was aimed to compare the criteria on quality of questionnaire development and psychometric property evaluation. The references listed in the ISOQOL and consequent included criteria were searched. Two reviewers independently screened papers to include articles with inclusion criteria as follows: fully evaluating the questionnaire development and/or psychometric property; published or unpublished, but not book. Two reviewers independently extracted the information which contained criteria name, types of questionnaire assessed, criteria purpose, research methods, content, evaluation method and etc. Qualitative analysis was conducted to synthesize common characteristics of criteria, and to compare what each criterion emphasized on. The results showed that 9 included criteria sharing the same purpose which evaluated the questionnaire development process and/or psychometric properties of the health related quality of life questionnaire or patient reported outcome. Experts consensus based on previous studies were the criteria development methods. The standard content included conceptual framework, targeted population, content validity, internal consistency, test-retest reliability, structure validity and responsiveness with interpretability. Assessment scoring system used in the criteria was categorized as 2- or 4-point Likert scales. Or document of evaluation evidence was required to be provided. It was concluded that nine criteria can be used to develop new questionnaires, evaluate existed/new questionnaires, or choose the right questionnaires for clinic, based on the following elements such as their research purpose, trials types, questionnaire types or questionnaire administrations.