DSM-5人格量表简版(中文版)信效度分析及其在中国人群中的初步运用  

The reliability and validity of the Chinese version of PID-5 brief form and its preliminary application in the Chinese population

作　　者：胡婵婵[1] 胡健波[1] 来建波 虞悦 黄满丽[1] 李漱广 许毅[1] 胡少华[1] HU Chanchan;HU Jianbo;LAI Jianbo;YU Yue;HUANG Manli;LI Shuguang;XU Yi;HU Shaohua(Department of Psychiatry,the First Affiliated Hospital,Zhejiang University School of Medicine,Hangzhou 310003,China)

机构地区：[1]浙江大学医学院附属第一医院精神卫生科、浙江省精神障碍诊疗和防治技术重点实验室,杭州310003 [2]浙江丽水学院心理健康教育与咨询中心

出　　处：《浙江医学》2020年第19期2037-2041,共5页Zhejiang Medical Journal

基　　金：浙江省医药卫生科技计划项目(2015KYB123)。

摘　　要：目的探讨《精神疾病诊断与统计手册》第5版(DSM-5)人格量表简版(PID-5-BF)(中文版)信效度及其在中国人群中初步运用的效果。方法选取2016年10月至2018年6月在浙江大学医学院附属第一医院精神卫生科住院的精神障碍患者(符合DSM-4的精神障碍诊断标准)以及同期在浙江大学医学院附属第一医院精神卫生科学习的浙江大学实习生和浙江丽水学院学生193例为研究对象,使用PID-5-BF(中文版)、人格障碍诊断问卷(PDQ-4+)进行测验,完成填写后统计问卷得分,获得测验结果。对所有受试者PID-5-BF(中文版)25个题目评分与5个维度评分进行Pearson相关和Spearman秩相关分析;采用Cronbach’s α系数评价PID-5-BF(中文版)内部一致性信度,采用主成分因子分析其结构效度;最后采用Pearson相关和Spearman秩相关对PID-5-BF(中文版)与PDQ-4的校标效度进行评价。结果经Pearson或Spearman相关分析,发现除第10题与分离特性未见相关外,PID-5-BF(中文版)其他25个题目与5个维度之间基本呈正相关(均P<0.05)。PID-5-BF(中文版)25个题目的Cronbach’s α系数为0.933,提示25个题目之间的内在一致性较好。针对25个题目的主成分因子分析中,22个题目的公因子方差值>0.50,仅第6、23、24题<0.50,提示在PID-5-BF(中文版)中这3个题目可能不适用。负性影响、分离特性、敌意、意志减退、精神质5个维度各自包含的5个题目之间Cronbach's α系数均>0.7,提示各维度的内部一致性均较好;删除任何1个题目后,负性影响、分离特性、精神质维度的一致性变差;而敌意、意志减退维度的一致性更好。以PDQ-4+为校标进行Pearson相关和Spearman秩相关分析,除敌意维度外,PID-5-BF(中文版)其余4个维度评分与PDQ-4+的因子评分存在正相关(均P<0.05)。结论PID-5-BF(中文版)具有良好的信效度,可作为中国人群人格障碍评估的有效工具。Objective To investigate the reliability and validity of the personality inventory for DSM-5 brief form(PID-5-BF)and its preliminary application in Chinese population.Methods We selected 47 patients hospitalized in the Mental Health Department of the First Affiliated Hospital of Zhejiang University Medical College(meeting the diagnostic criteria of DSM-4)and 146 students from Zhejiang University or from Zhejiang Lishui University during October 2016 to June 2018.All of them were required to fill the questionnaires of PID-5-BF(Chinese version)and the personality diagnosis questionnaire(PDQ-4+).After they finished,we used pearson correlation and spearman correlation to analysis the scores of the 25 questions and the 5 dimentions of the PID-5-BF(Chinese version)questionnaire.As for PID-5-BF(Chinese version)itself,we also used Cronbach's α coefficient to evaluate the internal consistency reliability and used principal component factor analysis to analyze the structural validity.Finally,we used pearson correlation and spearman correlation to evaluate the calibration validity of PID-5-BF(Chinese version)and PDQ-4.Results Both pearson and spearman correlation analysis of PID-5-BF(Chinese version)showed that there was a positive correlation between the 25 items and 5 dimensions(all P<0.05).The Cronbach's α coefficient of 25 items in PID-5-BF(Chinese version)was 0.933,which indicated that the internal consistency of the 25 items was good.The result of the principal component factor analysis of the 25 items showed the common factor square difference of the 22 out of 25 items were more than 0.50,and only the 6th,23rd and 24th questions were less than 0.50,which indicated that these three items may not be applicable in PID-5-BF(Chinese version).The Cronbach's α coefficients of the five dimensions(negative affect,detachment,antagonism,disinhibition,psychoticism)were all greater than 0.7,indicating that the internal consistency of each dimension was good.Deleting any one of the questions,the consistency of negative affect,d

关 键 词：人格障碍 《精神疾病诊断与统计手册》第5版人格量表简版 中文版 人格障碍诊断问卷 

分 类 号：R749[医药卫生—神经病学与精神病学]