重复性成套神经心理状态测验的信度、效度分析  

Repeatable Battery for the Assessment of Neuropsychological Status as a Screening Test in Chinese:Reliability and Validity

作　　者：张保华[1,2] 谭云龙[2] 张五芳[1] 王志仁[1] 杨贵刚[2] 石川[1] 张向阳[2] 周东丰[1] 

机构地区：[1]北京大学精神卫生研究所、卫生部精神卫生学重点实验室(北京大学),北京100191 [2]北京回龙观医院,北京100096

出　　处：《中国心理卫生杂志》2008年第12期865-869,共5页Chinese Mental Health Journal

基　　金：首都医学发展基金(2007-476);北京市优秀人才基金(20061D0301400098);国家重点基础研究发展计划(2007BC512307)

摘　　要：目的:对用于精神障碍患者认知功能测评的重复性成套神经心理状态测验(Repeatable Battery for the Assessment of Neuropsychological Status,RBANS)中文版的信度和效度作初步验证。方法:从北京市城乡方便取样,做横断面调查,451名健康人群完成RBANS测验,其中97人同时完成简易韦氏成人智力、韦氏记忆测验考察效标效度;41人间隔12周再次进行了RBANS测验。对获取的数据进行相关分析和因子分析。结果:反映内部一致性的Cronbachα系数在RBANS总量表为0.90,在即刻记忆、视觉广度、言语功能、注意、延迟记忆分量表分别为0.86,0.68,0.67,0.85,0.80。总量表的重测信度为0.90,5个分量表的重测信度分别为0.65,0.68,0.53,0.80,0.79(P均<0.01)。以简易韦氏成人智力、韦氏记忆测验为效标,结果除简易韦氏成人智力量表的言语得分与RBANS量表的视觉空间因子间相关性无统计学意义,RBANS与简易韦氏成人智力和韦氏记忆量表总分和各因子分均存在有统计学意义的正相关(r=0.21-0.59,P均<0.01)。验证性因素分析结果χ2/df为4.13,相对拟合指数(CFI)为0.91,非范拟合指数(NNFI)为0.93,近似均方根误差(RMSEA)为0.079。12个分测验的完全标准化解(MI)分别为:0.80,0.74,0.61,0.38,0.61,0.90,0.66,0.60,0.81,0.60,0.81,0.73。结论:重复性成套神经心理状态测验是一个信效度比较好的认知功能评定工具。Objective： To explore the reliability and validity of the Chinese version of Repeatable Battery for the Assessment of Neuropsyehological Status （ RBANS）, which is specially for assessing cognitive functions in non-dementia mental disorders. Methods： Altogether 451 healthy adults who were recruited from both rural and urban areas in Beijing were evaluated with the RBANS, and 97 adults were tested with the Brief Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale （WAIS） and Wechsler Memory Scale simultaneously （WMS） . Forty-one adults were reevaluated with RBANS 12 weeks later. The data was analyzed by using correlation analysis and factor analysis. Results： The Cronbachs＇α coefficient of RBANS total scale was 0. 90; the Cronbachs＇α coefficients of immediate memory, visuospatial, language, attention and delayed memory were 0. 86, 0. 68, 0. 67, 0. 85 and 0. 80 respectively. The test-retest reliability of total scale was 0.90 and that of subscales were 0. 65, 0. 68, 0. 53, 0. 80 and 0. 79 respectively （ P 〈0. 01） . There were significant positive correlation between the scores of RBANS and those of WAIS and WMS （ r = 0. 21 - 0. 59, P 〈0.01 ） , except that there was no correlation between the language score of WAIS and the visuospatial score of RBANS. Lisrel Confirmatory factor analysis showed that the 5-subscale model of RBANS was reasonable （ χ^2/df= 4. 13, CFI = 0.91, NNFI =0.93, RMSEA =0.079, MI =0.80, 0.74, 0.61, 0.38, 0.61, 0.90, 0.66, 0.60, 0.81, 0.60, 0. 81 and 0. 73 ） . Conclusions： The Chinese version of RBANS is a reliable tool for cognitive function assessment with reasonable reliability and validity.

关 键 词：神经心理测验 信度 效度 横断面研究 

分 类 号：B845.1[哲学宗教—心理学]