| 不同类型评价方式对注意缺陷多动障碍患儿核心症状评估的一致性分析 |
| 投稿时间：2025-02-04 修订日期：2025-02-21 点此下载全文 |
| 引用本文：杨珠虹,刘舒,杨昕,张陈靓,林卿,洪阿亮,王青绸.不同类型评价方式对注意缺陷多动障碍患儿核心症状评估的一致性分析[J].医学研究杂志,2025,54(7):140-144 |
| DOI：
10.11969/j.issn.1673-548X.2025.07.025 |
| 摘要点击次数: 4 |
| 全文下载次数: 6 |
|
| 基金项目:福建省临床重点专科资助项目(XE2023-ETBJ-D01);福建省厦门市自然科学基金资助项目(3502Z20227146)；复旦大学附属儿科医院厦门医院青年科研基金资助项目(CHP-2022-YRF-0012) |
|
| 中文摘要:目的 旨在评估不同评估工具[包括注意缺陷多动障碍(attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, ADHD)诊断量表、Conners父母症状问卷(parent symptom questionnaire,PSQ)和视听整合连续测试(IVA-cognitive performance test,IVA-CPT)]在ADHD儿童的多动冲动和注意缺陷表现中的一致性及相关性。方法 对2019年6月～2021年2月在复旦大学附属儿科医院厦门医院就诊的407例ADHD儿童进行了回顾性分析,分析由患儿完成IVA-CPT测试,家长完成ADHD诊断量表和PSQ问卷结果之间的一致性。结果 ADHD诊断量表与IVA-CPT测试之间存在一致性,但程度较低(κ=0.13,P=0.01)；ADHD诊断量表与PSQ之间的一致性也较低(κ=0.29,P=0.01),而PSQ与IVA-CPT之间则没有一致性。ADHD诊断量表中的注意缺陷评分与多动冲动部分评分呈正相关(r=0.33,P＜0.001),而IVA-CPT的注意力商数与ADHD诊断量表的多动冲动及注意缺陷部分评分均呈负相关(r值分别为-0.17和-0.22,P均＜0.001)。结论 尽管不同评估工具在ADHD的评估中存在一致性,但一致性较差,提示在临床实践中需谨慎解读评估结果,并强调综合使用多种评估工具的必要性。未来的研究应探索进一步优化评估工具的可能性,以提高ADHD的诊断准确性和干预效果。 |
| 中文关键词:注意缺陷多动障碍 ADHD诊断量表 Conners父母症状问卷 视听整合连续测试 一致性 相关性 |
| |
| Consistency Analysis of Core Symptom Assessment in Children with Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder by Different Types of Evaluation Modalities. |
|
|
| Abstract:Objective This study aimed to evaluate the consistency and correlation among various assessment tools, such as the attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) diagnostic Scale, the Conners parent symptom questionnaire (PSQ), and the IVA-cognitive performance test (IVA-CPT), in measuring hyperactivity-impulsivity and attention deficits in children with ADHD. Methods407 cases of children with ADHD who attended the Xiamen Hospital of Fudan University Pediatrics Hospital from June 2019 to February 2021 were retrospectively analyzed. The consistency between the results of the IVA-CPT test completed by the children and the results of the ADHD diagnostic scale and PSQ completed by their parents were assessed. Results The agreement between the ADHD diagnostic scale and the IVA-CPT test was low (κ=0.13, P=0.01), as was the agreement between the ADHD diagnostic scale and the PSQ (κ=0.29, P=0.01). Additionally, there was no agreement between the PSQ and the IVA-CPT. The sentence is too complex and should be broken down for clarity. The attention deficit and hyperactive-impulsive component scores on the ADHD diagnostic scale showed a significant positive correlation (r=0.33, P<0.001). In contrast, the Attention Quotient of the IVA-CPT demonstrated a significant negative correlation with both the hyperactive-impulsive (r=-0.17, P<0.001) and attention deficit component scores (r=-0.22, P<0.001) of the ADHD diagnostic scale. Conclusion Despite the consistency of different assessment tools in the assessment of ADHD, the consistency was poor, suggesting that the results should be interpreted with caution in clinical practice and emphasizing the need to use a combination of assessment tools. Future studies should explore the possibility of further optimizing assessment tools to improve the diagnostic accuracy and intervention effects of ADHD. |
| keywords:Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder ADHD diagnostic scale Conners parental symptom questionnaire Audiovisual integration continuum test Consistency Correlation |
| 查看全文 查看/发表评论 下载PDF阅读器 |
|
|
|
