■期望可能会改变结果。然而,研究往往无法衡量预期。这就需要一个简短有效和可靠的预期措施。
■为了研究进入针灸或休息的个体的治疗期望,在类别量表上分级的单项目期望测量的有效性和测试重新测试信度,数字评分量表(NRS)和视觉模拟量表(VAS),并确定量表之间的心理测量差异。
■在本方法论研究中,在363名参与者接受针灸治疗之前,他们对治疗预期进行了测量(真正的传统穿透性或非穿透性伸缩假针灸,n=239,98%,回应)或只涉及休息的对照治疗(n=120,100%,回应),旨在提高放松水平。治疗预期指标,按五级类别评分,八级NRS和100毫米VAS,进行了测试重测可靠性测试。在基线测量期望和松弛水平,治疗前后(n=729个预期测量值)。
■安排针灸或休息的参与者认为适度(四分位数间,IQR,适度多)和多(适度多)的治疗是有效的。类别量表的测试和重新测试之间的类别内相关系数与Kappa系数为.868/.868,NRS的.820/.820,VAS和.856/.854。中间步骤“适度相信治疗是有效的”相当于中位数4(IQR,3-4)在NRS上,在VAS上的中位数为52mm(IQR42-52)。在类别量表上,应答率为708(97%),707(97%)在NRS上,和703(96%)在VAS上。所有三个量表都区分出治疗前期望在报告放松水平改善的个体中更积极(P<.001-.003)。VAS对检测预期随时间的变化具有更高的响应性(预期增加了71%),与NRS(增加52%)和类别量表(增加12%)相比,P<.001。
■个人进入针灸,或者控制干预,提出了积极的治疗期望,预期指标提供了令人满意的可靠性,有效性,高反应率,敏感性,和响应性。想要在临床试验中控制预期相关偏倚的综合癌症治疗研究人员应该考虑使用单一项目预期测量来测量预期。
UNASSIGNED: Expectations may modify outcomes. However, studies often fail to measure expectations. This raises the need for a brief valid and reliable expectancy measure.
UNASSIGNED: To study treatment expectations in individuals entering acupuncture or rest, validity and test re-test reliability of a single-item expectancy measure graded on a category scale, a Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) and a Visual Analog Scale (VAS), and to identify psychometric differences between the scales.
UNASSIGNED: In this methodology study, treatment expectations were measured in 363 participants before they received acupuncture (genuine traditional penetrating or non-penetrating telescopic sham acupuncture, n = 239, 98%, responded) or a control treatment involving just rest (n = 120, 100%, responded), aimed to improve level of relaxation. A treatment expectancy measure, graded on a five-grade category scale, an eight-grade NRS and a 100 mm VAS, was tested for test re-test reliability. Level of expectation and relaxation was measured at baseline, pre- and post-therapy (n = 729 expectancy measurements).
UNASSIGNED: The participants scheduled for acupuncture or rest believed moderately (Inter Quartile Range, IQR, moderately-much) and much (IQR moderately-much) the treatment to be effective. The Intra-Class Correlation coefficient versus Kappa coefficient between test and re-test was .868/.868 for the category scale, .820/.820 for the NRS, and .856/.854 for the VAS. The middle step \"Believe moderately the treatment to be effective\" was equivalent with median 4 (IQR, 3-4) on NRS and median 52 mm (IQR 42-52) on VAS. The response rates were 708 (97%) on the category scale, 707 (97%) on the NRS, and 703 (96%) on the VAS. All three scales discriminated that pre-therapy expectations were more positive in the individuals who reported an improvement in relaxation level (P < .001-.003). The VAS presented higher responsiveness to detect expectancy changes over time (71% increased expectation), compared to the NRS (52% increased) and the category scale (12% increased), P < .001.
UNASSIGNED: Individuals entering acupuncture, or a control intervention, presented positive treatment expectations, and the expectancy measure presented satisfactory reliability, validity, high response rates, sensitiveness, and responsiveness. Integrative cancer therapy researchers who want to control for expectancy-related bias in clinical trials should consider measuring expectation using the single-item expectancy measure.