AT量表

合集下载

ATICE评分(重症监护环境优化量表)

分量表
条目
临床状态
分值
意识
清醒状态
强烈刺激后无睁眼反应，脸部也无痛苦表情
0
强烈刺激后无睁眼反应，仅脸部有痛苦表情
1
强烈刺激后能睁眼
2
轻痛刺激后无睁眼反应
3
言语命令能睁眼
4
自主睁眼
5
理解能力
睁眼/闭眼
1
张嘴
1
对视
1
点头
1
闭眼的同时张嘴
1
耐受
镇静状态
危及生命的躁动
0
躁动，不服从语言性指令
1ห้องสมุดไป่ตู้
躁动，服从语言性指令
2
镇静
3
人机顺应性
呼吸机送气期间无气流对抗
1
呼吸频率＜30/min
1
无呛咳
1
未应用辅助呼吸肌
1
脸部放松
持久的痛苦表情
0
严重激怒表情
1
适度激怒表情
2
放松表情
3
ATICE评分

霍兰德职业兴趣测试量表英文版

霍兰德职业兴趣测试量表英文版(中英文实用版)Title: Holland Career Interest Test ScaleContent:The Holland Career Interest Test, developed by John Holland, is a widely recognized assessment used to identify an individual"s vocational interests and personality types.This test is based on the theory that there are six basic types of occupational interests: Realistic (R), Investigative (I), Artistic (A), Social (S), Enterprising (E), and Conventional (C).Below is a brief description of each interest type:1.Realistic (R):- Individuals with a realistic interest are skilled in using tools and enjoy hands-on, operational work.- They have strong manual dexterity, coordination, and prefer concrete tasks.- They are not very articulate, conservative in their approach, and tend to be modest.- They lack social skills and often prefer to work independently.2.Investigative (I):- Those with an investigative interest are curious and enjoy scientific, analytical, and intellectual pursuits.- They have a strong desire for knowledge and are skilled atproblem-solving.- They are precise, logical, and prefer to work with data and facts.3.Artistic (A):- Individuals with an artistic interest are creative, imaginative, and expressive.- They have a strong appreciation for aesthetics and are skilled in various forms of artistic expression.- They tend to be emotional, open-minded, and prefer unstructured environments.4.Social (S):- Socially-oriented individuals enjoy helping, teaching, and counseling others.- They are empathetic, nurturing, and skilled in communication.- They value relationships and prefer work that involves interaction with people.5.Enterprising (E):- Those with an enterprising interest are ambitious, competitive, and persuasive.- They are skilled in leadership, sales, and business management.- They are energetic, outgoing, and enjoy taking risks.6.Conventional (C):- Individuals with a conventional interest are organized, detail-oriented, and enjoy structured work.- They are skilled in record-keeping, clerical work, and financial management.- They are reliable, practical, and prefer work that follows clear rules and procedures.The Holland Career Interest Test Scale consists of various questions designed to assess your preferences in different activities and work environments.By understanding your interest types, you can make informed decisions about your career path and educational choices.---标题：霍兰德职业兴趣测试量表内容：霍兰德职业兴趣测试是由约翰·霍兰德开发的一种广泛认可的评估工具，用于识别个人的职业兴趣和人格类型。

儿童社交反应量表教师版分数

儿童社交反应量表教师版分数1、社交行为量表社交行为量表(autism behavior checklist,ABC)是20世纪80年代由Krμg等编制。

该量表共57个项目,包含了5个维度：感觉、行为、语言、运动、交往。

每个项目4级评分,全量表最高分为158分,适用于3-35岁的人群进行社交筛查。

量表填写者至少与调查对象共同生活1个月左右,填表人可为父母、主要抚养者或教师。

ABC从研发至今未进行过修订。

中文版ABC量表首次报道见于1993年,由杨晓玲等引进,在60例社交儿童、157例精神发育迟缓儿童及108例发育正常儿童进行了量表的信效度测试,制定了中文版ABC的筛查切点值：总分≥31分作为初筛阳性,总分≥67分高度怀疑社交。

基于该研究结果,中文版的ABC 量表在临床辅助社交的诊断、筛查、干预效果评估等方面得到了广泛使用。

在后续的研究中,有研究者将ABC量表和其他中文版筛查工具进行比较,提示ABC和其他中文版筛查问卷同样具有较好的信度和效度。

ABC量表尽管在我国用于临床社交辅助诊断、社交流行病学调查、干预效果的评估等方面广泛使用,但该量表从编制后从未跟新。

关于社交的概念和诊断标准,以及人们对社交的认识均发生了很大的变化。

有研究发现,ABC不能较好从其他发育障碍疾病中区分社交。

故在后续关于社交的研究中对该量表的使用值得商榷。

2、社交沟通问卷社交沟通问卷(social communication questionnaire,SCQ)是1999年由Rutter和Lord两位专家共同编制,该问卷基于社交诊断金标准工具-社交诊断访谈量表(Autism DiagnosticInterview-Revised,ADI-R)编制的问卷,该问卷由40个条目,3个维度组成：社交沟通领域,沟通领域以及重复刻板行为领域。

总分≥15分,提示初筛阳性,适用于智力年龄＞2岁的儿童进行社交的筛查。

中文版的SCQ问卷由徐秀等于2009年6月引进。

消费者行为学量表精选

说明:消费者行为学离不开对消费者行为的测量，如何开发适当的测量工具是消费者行为理论和实践领域都非常重视的内容。

目前，在国外，已有正式出版的消费者行为和心理测量工具方面的手册，在国内，专门针对中国消费者行为测量的工具还很少，即便有一些量表被提出来加以运用，也常常会因为量表本身的信度和效度不够理想而无法广泛推广。

下面是国外一本量表手册中的部分目录，目的是为使用《消费者行为学》（中国版）的师生提供一个资料来源，在需要使用以下任何一个量表时，请注意与出版社或量表的研究者联系，在取得许可后，方可用于自己正式出版论文或著作，并且不要忘记注明出处。

另外，我们也精选了部分用来测量消费者行为某些方面的量表，供读者参考。

《营销量表手册》（作者：William O. Bearden, 1945-；书名：Handbook of Marketing Scales：Multi-item measures for marketing and consumer behavior research 2nd ed；出版社：SAGE Publication India Pvt. Lid，1999）第一章：简介背景量表选择的标准书的格式警告与提示测量的评价第二章：特质与个体差异变量与人际取向、需求/偏好和自我概念有关的量表：内倾——外倾取向：社会偏好量表（1962）人际取向：CAD量表（1967）认知需求：NFC（1982）情感需求：NFE（1995）需要评价量表：NES（1996）精确需要：NFP（1997）一致性偏好：PRC（1995）数字信息偏好：PNI（1993）理性—经验量表：REI（1996）浪漫—古典：RC指数（1995）自我实现——消费者自我实现检验：自我概念澄清：SCC（1996）自我概念、个人概念（演员）、产品概念（汽车）（1981）自我描述：离群—合群：SC（1997）性别认知量表：SIS（1987）虚荣：虚荣的特质方面（1995）与消费者强迫性与冲动性有关的量表：强迫性购买量表（1988）强迫性消费：冲动：冲动购买量表（1995）冲动：冲动购买倾向（1997）冲动—消费者冲动量表：CIS（1996）与国家形象与归属有关的量表：**国家形象量表（1993）**国家—产地量表（1992，1994）**种族中心主义—消费者种族中心主义：CETSCALE （1987）与消费者意见领袖和意义寻找有关的量表：**专家：消费者专家（1994）**时尚领袖（1993）**市场专家：提供市场场所和购物信息的癖好（1987）。

常模。详见附录五学习适应量表上海...

摘要学习适应量表（增订版）是一套可以快速、便捷、有效地了解学生学习适应性的测验工具，被试是小学四年级至初中三年级学生，主要测量学生的学习方法、学习习惯、学习态度、学习环境和身心适应等。

本研究旨在修订一个这个在台湾地区使用广泛的优良的学习适应性量表，并使其能直接运用于上海地区的教育实践。

本论文共有四个部分，在论文的第一部分，作者首先对适应、适应性以及学习适应性等概念作简单梳理，并对我国学习适应性研究现状进行了论述。

第二部分是对学习适应量表（增订版）的修订，主要包括学习适应量表（上海版）初稿的形成，第一次试测结果的汇报，第二次试测结果的汇报，以及学习适应量表（上海版）在心理测量学上的各项指标。

这次修订没有改动学习适应量表（增订版）的测验结构，只是根据试测项目分析结果对部分测题及其它方面进行了修改或改进，进而制定了学习适应量表（上海版）的上海市区参考性常模。

在第三部分中，作者具体分析了学习适应壁表（上海版）的应用研究。

主要包括性别、年级、父母文化程度、家庭经济状况、家庭完整性、学校类型等对学生学习适应性的影响。

在第四部分中，作者介绍了本论文的特色和创新之处，并提出了对本研究的进～步设想。

此外，根据学习适应囊表（上海版）的被试中心解释模式对一名学生进行了个案分析，主要是对其测验结果的被试中心解释模式的实例分析。

此次应用研究不仅为学习适应量表（上海版）良好的信度、效度提供了依据，表明了量表的可靠性和有效性，更重要的是为上海市中小学生提供了一套快速而有效的、用于鉴定学习适应性的测验工具，以补偿我国现有同类测验量表的不足。

同时也为把学习适应量表（增订版）推广到祖国大陆地区跨出了关键一步，为海峡两岸在心理与教育测验领域中的携手合作奠定了基础。

关键词：适应性学习适应性学习适应壁表（增订版）修订学习适应量表（上海版）应用研究ＡＢＳＴＲＡＣＴＬｅａｒｎｉｎｇＡｄａｐｔａｂｉｌｉｔｙＳｃａｌｅ（Ｒｅｖｉｓｅｄ）ｉｓａｃｏｎｖｅｎｉｅｎｔｔｏｏｌｔｏｅｘａｍｉｎｅｓｔｕｄｅｎｔｓ’ｌｅａｒｎｉｎｇａｄａｐｔａｂｉｌｉｔｙ．Ｉｔｓｅｒｖｅｓｓｔｕｄｅｎｔｓｆｒｏｍｐｒｉｍａｒｙｇｒａｄｅ４ｔｏｓｅｃｏｎｄａｒｙｇｒａｄｅ３．Ｉｔｗｉｌｌｓｕｒｖｅｙｓｔｕｄｅｎｔｓ’ｍｅｔｈｏｄｏｆｓｔｕｄｙ，ｈａｂｉｔｏｆｓｔｕｄｙ，ａｔｔｉｔｕｄｅｏｆｓｔｕｄｙ，ｅｎｖｉｒｏｎｍｅｎｔｏｆｓｔｕｄｙ，ａｄａｐｔ砒ｉｏｎｏｆｂｏｄｙａｎｄｍｉｎｄ．ＴｈｅｄｉｓｓｅｒｔａｆｉｏｎｔａｋｅｓｔｈｅｒｅｖｉｓｉｏｎａｎｄａｐｐｌｉｃａｔｉｏｎｏｆＬｅａｒｎｉｎｇＡｄａｐｔａｂｉｌｉｔｙＳｃａｌｅ（Ｒｅｖｉｓｅｄ）踮ｔｈｅｔｈｅｍｅ．ａｔｔｅｍｐｔｉｎｇｔｏｒｅｖｉｓｅｔｈｅｓｃａｌｅ．ｍａｋｅｉｔａｎｅｘｃｅｌｌｅｎｔｐｓｙｃｈｏｍｅｔｒｉｃｐｒｏｐｅｒｔｙ，ａｎｄｄ０ｓｏｍｅａｐｐｌｉｃａｔｉｏｎｒｅｓｅａｒｃｈｅｓ．Ｉｎｔｈｅｆｉｒｓｔｓｅｃｔｉｏｎｏｆｔｈｅｄｉｓｓｅｒｔａｔｉｏｎ，ｔｈｅｗｒｉｔｅｒｅｘｐａｔｉａｔｅｓｕｐｏｎｔｈｅｓｉｇｎｉｆｉｃａｎｃｅａｎｄｆｏｕｎｄａｔｉｏｎｓｏｆｍａｋｉｎｇｔｈｅｒｅｓｅａｒｃｈ．Ａｎｄｔｈｅｎｔｈｅｗｒｉｔｅｒｉｎｔｒｏｄｕｃｅｓｔｈｅｇｏａｌｓａｎｄｍｅａｎｉｎｇｏｆｔｈｅｗｈｏｌｅｒｅｓｅａｒｃｈ．Ｉｎｔｈｅｓｅｃｏｎｄｓｅｃｔｉｏｎ，ｔｈｅｗｒｉｔｅｒｒｅｐｏｒｔｓｔｈｅｗｏｒｋｓｏｆｒｅｖｉｓｉｎｇＬｅａｍｉｎｇＡｄａｐｔａｂｉｌｉｔｙＳｃａｌｅ（Ｒｅｖｉｓｅｄ），ａｎｄｔｈｅｓｅｉｎｃｌｕｄｅｗｈｙａｎｄｈｏｗｔｏｒｅｖｉｓｅＬｅａｒｎｉｎｇＡｄａｐｔａｂｉｌｉｔｙＳｃａｌｅ，ｔｈｅｒｅｓｕｌｔｏｆｔｈｅｆｉｒｓｔａｎｄｓｅｃｏｎｄｔｒｉａｌ－ｔｅｓｔ，ａｎｄｔｈｅｓｔａｔｉｓｔｉｃａｌｉｎｄｅｘｏｆＬｅａｒｎｉｎｇＡｄａｐｔａｂｉｌｉｔｙＳｃａｌｅ（Ｓｈａｎｇｈａｉ）．Ｗｅｄｉｄｎ’ｔｃｈａｎｇｅｔｈｅｆｒａｍｅｗｏｒｋｏｆＬｅａｒｎｉｎｇＡｄａｐｔａｂｉｌｉｔｙＳｃａｌｅ（Ｒｅｖｉｓｅｄ），ｂｕｔａｍｅｎｄｅｄｐａｒｔｏｆｔｈｅｉｔｅｍｓａｎｄｓｏｍｅｏｔｈｅｒａｓｐｅｃｔｓ．ＷｅｃｏｎｓｔｉｔｕｔｅｄｔｈｅＲＯＩＴＵｏｆＬｅａｒｎｉｎｇＡｄａｐｔａｂｉｌｉｔｙＳｃａｌｅ（Ｓｈａｎｇｈａｉ）．Ｉｎｔｈｅｔｈｉｒｄｓｅｃｔｉｏｎ，ｔｈｅｗｒｉｔｅｒｒｅｐｏｒｔｓｔｈｅｒｅｓｅａｒｃｈｅｓｏｎＬｅａｒｎｉｎｇＡｄａｐｔａｂｉｌｉｔｙＳｃａｌｅ（Ｓｈａｎｇｈａｉ）’Ｓａｐｐｌｉｃａｔｉｏｎ，ｉｎｃｌｕｄｉｎｇｔｈｅｉｎｆｌｕｅｎｃｅｏｆｇｅｎｄｅｒ，ｇｒａｄｅ，ａｎｄａｃ澈ｓｔｕｄｙ．Ｉｎｔｈｅｆｏｕｒｔｈｐａｒｅｎｔｓ’ｅｄｕｃａｔｉｏｎａｌｌｅｖｅｌ．ｅｔｃｏｎｌｅａｒｎｉｎｇａｄａｐｔａｂｉｌｉｔｙｓｅｃｔｉｏｎ，ｔｈｅｗｒｉｔｅｒｉｎｔｒｏｄｕｃｅｄｔｈｅｆｅａｔｕｒｅｓａｎｄｉｎｎｏｖａｔｉｏｎｓｆｏｒｒｅｓｅａｒｃｈｉｌ礓ｄｅｅｐｌｙ．ＴｈｅｓｃｉｅｍｉｆｉｃｒｅｓｅａｒｃｈｅｓｉｎｄｉｃａｔｅｔｈｅＬｅａｒｎｉｎｇＡｄａｐｔａｂｉｌｉｔｙＳｃａｌｅ（Ｓｒｍｇｈａｉ）ｉｓａｔｅｓｔ、＾ｒｉｍｗｅｌｌｒｅｌｉａｂｉｌｉｔｙａｎｄｖａｌｉｄｉｔｙａｎｄｉｔｅａｒｌｓｅｒｖｅｅｄｕｃａｔｉｏｎａｌｐｒａｃｔｉｃｅ．Ｔｈｅｒｅｓｕｌｔｓｏｆｔｈｉｓｒｅｓｅａｒｃｈｃａｎｐｍｖｉｄｅａｓｅｔｏｆｖａｌｉｄａｎｄｃｏｎｖｅｎｉｅｎｔｔｅｓｔｉｎｓｔｒｕｍｅｎｔｆｏｒａｓｓｅｓｓｉｎｇｓｔｕｄｅｎｔｓ’ｌｅａｒｎｉｎｇａｄａｐｔａｂｉｌｉｔｙ，ａｎｄｍａｋｅｕｐｔｈｅｌａｃｋｓｏｆｃｏｎｇｅｎｅｒｉｎｓｔｒｕｍｅｎｔｓ．Ａｔｔｈｅｓａｍｅｔｉｍｅ，ｉｔｉｓａｌｓｏａｃｒｕｃｉａｌｓｔｅｐｗｈｉｃｈｂｒｉｎｇｓＬｅａｒｎｉｎｇＡｄａｐｔａｂｉｌｉｔｙＳｃａｌｅ（Ｒｅｖｉｓｅｄ）ｆｒｏｍＴａｌｗａｎｔｏｍａｉｎｌａｎｄｏｆＣｈｉｎａ．Ｋｅｙｗｏｒｄｓ：ａｄａｐｔａｂｉｌｉｔｙ，ｌｅａｒｎｉｎｇａｄａｐｔａｂｉｌｉｔｙ，ＬｅａｒｎｉｎｇＡｄａｐｔａｂｉｌｉｔｙＳｃａｌｅ（Ｒｅｖｉｓｅｄ），Ｒｅｖｉｓｉｎｇ，ＬｅａｒｎｉｎｇＡｄａｐｔａｂｉｌｉｔｙＳｃａｌｅ（Ｓｈａｎｇｈａｉ）ｏｎｒｅｓｅａｒｃｈｅｓｏｎｃｌｉｎｉｃａｌｕｓｅ学位论文独创性声明本人所呈交的学位论文是我在导炻的指导下进行的研究工作及取得的研究成果．据我所知，除文中已经注明引用的内容外，本论文不包含其他个人已经发表或撰写过的研究成果．对本文的研究做出重要贡献的个人和集体，均已在文中作了硬确说明并表示谢意。

简版无法忍受不确定性量表在中学生中应用的效度和信度

简版无法忍受不确定性量表在中学生中应用的效度和信度吴莉娟;王佳宁;齐晓栋【期刊名称】《中国心理卫生杂志》【年(卷),期】2016(030)009【摘要】目的:检验简版无法忍受不确定性量表(IUS-12)测评中学生人群的适用性.方法:选取中学生800人(样本1)用于进行条目分析和探索性因子分析;另外选取中学生475人(样本2),用于进行验证性因子分析及聚合效度、区分效度、组合信度以及内部一致性信度检验.在样本1中,选取90人施测特质焦虑分量表(T-AT)、元担忧量表(MWQ)、特质抑郁分量表(T-DS)、无法忍受不确定性量表(IUS)检验效标效度;半个月后,在样本Ⅰ中随机选取120人进行重测.结果:探索性因子分析得到预期性行为、抑制性行为与预期性情绪3个因子,累积解释量表总变异量的53.42％;验证性因子分析表明模型拟合较好(x2/df=2.57,CFI=0.91,TLI=0.88,RMSEA=0.05,SRMR=0.06);IUS-12中文版总分与T-AT、MWQ、T-DS、IUS得分均呈正相关(r=0.44、0.54、0.40、0.93,均P ＜0.001).IUS-12中文版总量表的Cronbach a系数和组合信度分别为0.79和0.83,3个因子的α系数和组合信度分另别为0.74和0.82、0.74和0.67、0.74和0.67;IUS-12中文版总量表的重测信度为0.80,3个因子的重测信度分别为0.82、0.67和0.66.结论:修订后的简版无法忍受不确定性量表测评中学生显示有良好的效度和信度.【总页数】6页(P700-705)【作者】吴莉娟;王佳宁;齐晓栋【作者单位】哈尔滨师范大学教育科学学院,哈尔滨150025;哈尔滨师范大学教育科学学院,哈尔滨150025;哈尔滨师范大学教育科学学院,哈尔滨150025【正文语种】中文【中图分类】B841.7;B844.2【相关文献】1.简版健康相关生存质量量表在中医内科门诊患者中测试的效度和信度 [J], 刘寒;何燕玲;缪菊明;王静夷;曾庆枝2.简版生活质量量表(SF-12)在农村高龄老年人中的测量信度与效度 [J], 王红雨;张林3.简版状态焦虑量表在大学生群体中的效度和信度 [J], 田彦英;杨东;DING Cody;曹梦露4.中文简版正念能力量表在多民族大学生中应用的信度和效度 [J], Lin Pingzhen;Wang Yanrong;Yang Bei5.中文版工作同盟量表简版修订版在住院精神分裂症患者中的信度和效度研究 [J], 陈如梦;陈剑华;徐一峰因版权原因，仅展示原文概要，查看原文内容请购买。

改良Ashworth和Tardieu量表

目录
Modified Ashworth Scale .......................................................................................................... 2 Purpose of the measure ............................................................................................................ 2 Available versions ...................................................................................................................... 2 Features of the measure ........................................................................................................... 3 Alternative forms of the Modified Ashworth Scale................................................................... 7 Client suitability ......................................................................................................................... 8 Modified Tardieu Scale (MTS) ................................................................................................. 10 Purpose of the measure .......................................................................................................... 10 Available versions .................................................................................................................... 11 Features of the measure ......................................................................................................... 12 Scoring and Score Interpretation ............................................................................................ 15 Alternative forms of the Modified Tardieu Scale .................................................................... 17 Client suitability ....................................................................................................................... 19

列举评比量表

列举评比量表
评比量表是用来对不同项目或对象进行评估和比较的工具。

以下是一些常见的评比量表：
Likert量表：用于测量受访者对某种观点或陈述的态度程度，通常包括五个选择项，从“非常同意”到“非常不同意”。

杜鲁门量表：用于评估人格特质和情绪状态，包括情绪因子和人格因子。

疼痛评分量表：用于评估患者疼痛的程度，常见的有视觉模拟评分量表（VAS）和数字评分量表（NRS）。

斯坦福睡眠量表：用于评估睡眠质量，包括睡眠时间、睡眠深度、入睡困难等方面的评估。

贝克抑郁量表：用于评估抑郁症状的严重程度，包括情绪、生活满意度等方面的评估。

这些评比量表在不同领域和场景中被广泛应用，可以帮助研究人员和临床医生对各种因素进行客观评估和比较。

脑卒中常用量表

的缩写。
现在九页，总共五十页。
GCS评分注意事项儿童和婴儿如何评分？儿童受言语能力的限制，
婴儿受言语能力和自主活动能力的限制，儿童和婴儿的GCS是根据成人GCS修订而成的。
如果两次刺激后患者的反应不同，或者两侧肢体反应不同，如何评分？按其最好反应评分。
如何用GCS反映患者的病情变化？一般是做成类似于体温单的表格（chart），连续评定，观察其动态
• 或45度（仰卧位）。上肢10秒前下落记录为滑动。
• The limb is placed in the appropriate position: extend the arms (palms down) 90° (sitting) or 45° (supine). Drift is scored if the arm falls before 10 seconds.
变化。
现在十要最需要注意什么？一定要客观评价，完全遵从量表规定，不要受主观影响；刺激强度要足够。
睁眼反应的局限性有哪些？持续性植物状态的人自发睁眼，使评分不能反映其实际病情。但我们只能按看到的评。
现在十一页，总共五十页。
GCS评分注意事项疼痛刺激睁眼评分要注意什么？采取周围性疼
• 量表定义 Scale Definition:
• 0 =无下落 No drift • 1 =下落，肢体在90（或45）度能维持不超过10秒，下落
• Drift; limb holds 90° (or 45°) but drifts down
• 2 =能对抗一些重力，但不能达到或维持90（或45）度
现在二十一页，总共五十页。
• 8. 感觉 Sensory: 用针尖刺激/撤除刺激观察昏迷或失语患者的感觉和表情。

工作特征量表中文版

Work Design Questionnaire(工作设计调查问卷——Morgeson&Humphrey)Autonomy(自主性)Work Scheduling Autonomy（工作调度自主性）1.The job allows me to make my own decisions about how to schedule my work.这项工作能让我自主决定工作安排。

2.The job allows me to decide on the order in which things are done on the job.这项工作可使我决定工作中要做的事情的次序。

3.The job allows me to plan how I do my work.这项工作可使我计划如何工作。

Decision-Making Autonomy(决策的自主性)1.The job gives me a chance to use my personal initiative or judgment in carrying out the work. 这项工作给了我一个在完成工作中使用个人自主性和判断力的机会。

2.The job allows me to make a lot of decisions on my own.这项工作可使我自己做很多决定。

3.The job provides me with significant autonomy in making decisions.在决策时，这项工作给了我极大的自主性。

Work Methods Autonomy（工作方法的自主性）1.The job allows me to make decisions about what methods I use to complete my work.这项工作可使我决定用什么方法来完成这项工作。

2.The job gives me considerable opportunity for independence and freedom in how I do the work.这项工作给了我很大的关于如何做这项工作的独立性和自由。

能谱的wt%和at%

能谱（Energy-dispersive X-ray spectroscopy，简称EDS）是一种通过测量材料中X射线反射的能量谱，来确定材料成分的方法。

在能谱分析中，通常使用wt%和at%来表示元素含量的百分比。

wt%是指以质量分数为单位计算元素在物质中的含量，是物质中某种元素的质量与整个物质质量之比。

例如，一个样品中的镁含量是wt%为2.0%，意味着100g的样品中有2.0g的镁。

at%是指以原子分数为单位计算元素在物质中的含量，是物质中某种元素的原子数与所有元素原子数之比。

例如，一个样品中的氧含量是at%为50.0%，意味着100个原子中有50个是氧原子。

在进行能谱分析时，通常使用wt%来表示元素含量，因为wt%更容易被研究人员、机器或软件解读，也因为它更直接地相关到样品的总质量。

但是，在一些特殊应用场景下，at%可能更重要，例如在准确测量材料的元素配比时，需要使用at%以考虑每个原子的贡献。

国际体力活动量表评分标准（内含中文版）

Guidelines for Data Processing andAnalysis of the Internationa 丨 PhysicalActivity Questionnaire (IPAQ) 一 Short andLong FormsNovember 2005ContentsIntroductionUses of IPA Q InstrumentsSummary Characteristics of Short and Long FormsOverview of Continuous and Categorical A nalyses of IPA QProtocol for Short FormProtocol for Long FormData Processing RulesSummary AlgorithmsAppendix 1.A t A Glance IPA Q Scoring Protocol - Short Forms Appendix 2. A t A Glance IPA Q Scoring Protocol - Long FormsIntroduction This document describes recommended methods of scoring the data derived from the telephone / interview administered and self-administered IPAQ short and long form instruments. Themethods outlined provide a revision to earlier scoring protocols for the IPAQ short form andprovide for the first time a comparable scoring method for IPAQ long form. Latest versions ofIPAQ instruments are available from www.ipaq.ki.se.Although there are many different ways to analyse physical activity data, to date there is no formal consensus on a …correct‟ method for defining or describing levels of physical activity based on self-report population surveys. The use of different scoring protocols makes it very difficult to compare within and between countries, even when the same instrument has been used. Use of these scoring methods will enhance the comparability between surveys, provided identical sampling and survey methods have been used.2. Uses of IPA Q InstrumentsIPAQ short form is an instrument designed primarily for population surveillance of physical activity among adults. It has been developed and tested for use in adults (age range of 15-69 years) and until further development and testing is undertaken the use of IPAQ with older an d younger age groups is not recommended.IPAQ short and long forms are sometimes being used as an evaluation tool in intervention studies, but this was not the intended purpose of IPAQ. Users should carefully note the range of domains and types of activities included in IPAQ before using it in this context. Use as an outcome measure in small scale intervention studies is not recommended.3. Summary Characteristics of IPA Q Short and Long Forms1. IPAQ assesses physical activity undertaken across a comprehensive set of domainsincluding:a. leisure time physical activityb. domestic and gardening (yard) activitiesc. work-related physical activityd. transport-related physical activity;2. The IPAQ short form asks about three specific types of activity undertaken in the fourdomains introduced above. The specific types of activity that are assessed are walking, moderate-intensity activities and vigorous-intensity activities.3. The items in the short IPAQ form were structured to provide separate scores on walking,moderate-intensity and vigorous-intensity activity. Computation of the total score for the short form requires summation of the duration (in minutes) and frequency (days) of walking, moderate-intensity and vigorous-intensity activities. Domain specific estimates cannot be estimated.The IPAQ long form asks details about the specific types of activities undertakenwithin each of the four domains. Examples include walking for transportation andmoderate-intensity leisure-time activity.The items in the long IPAQ form were structured to provide separate domain specificscores for walking, moderate-intensity and vigorous-intensity activity within each of the work, transportation, domestic chores and gardening (yard) and leisure-time domains.Computation of the total scores for the long form requires summation of the duration (in minutes) and frequency (days) for all the types of activities in all domains. Domainspecific scores or activity specific subscores may be calculated. Domain specific scores require summation of the scores for walking, moderate-intensity and vigorous-intensity activities within the specific domain, whereas activity-specific scores require summation of the scores for the specific type of activity across domains.4. Overview of Continuous and Categorical A nalyses of IPA QBoth categorical and continuous indicators of physical activity are possible from both IPAQ forms. However, given the non-normal distribution of energy expenditure in many populations, it is suggested that the continuous indicator be presented as median minutes/week or median MET-minutes/week rather than means (such as mean minutes/week or meanMET-minutes/week).4.1 Continuous VariablesData collected with IPAQ can be reported as a continuous measure. One measure of the volume of activity can be computed by weighting each type of activity by its energy requirements defined in METs to yield a score in ME十-minutes. METs are multiples of the resting metabolic rate and a MET-minute is computed by multiplying the Met score of an activity by the minutes performed. MET-minute scores are equivalent to kilocalories for a 60 kilogram person. Kilocalories may be computed from MET-minutes using the following equation: MET-min x (weight in kilograms/60 kilograms). MET-minutes/day orMET-minutes/week can be presented although the latter is more frequently used and is thus suggested.Details for the computation for summary variables from IPAQ short and long forms are detailed below. As there are no established thresholds for presenting MET- minutes, the IPAQ Research Committee propose that these data are reported as comparisons of median values and interquartile ranges for different populations.4.2 Categorical Variable: Rationale for Cut Point ValuesThere are three levels of physical activity proposed to classify populations:1. Low2. Moderate3. HighThe algorithms for the short and long forms are defined in more detail in Sections 5.3 and 6.3, respectively. Rules for data cleaning and processing prior to computing the algorithms appear in Section 7.Regular participation is a key concept included in current public health guidelines for physical activity.1 Therefore, both the total volume and the number of days/sessions are included in the IPAQ analysis algorithms.The criteria for these levels have been set taking into account that IPAQ asks questions in all domains of daily life, resulting in higher median MET-minutes estimates than would have been estimated from leisure-time participation alone. The criteria for these three levels are shown below.Given that measures suc h as IPAQ assess total physical activity in all domains, the “leisure time physical activity” based public health recommendation of 30 minutes on most days will be achieved by most adults in a population. Although widely accepted as a goal, in absolute terms 30 minutes of moderate-intensity activity is low and broadly equivalent to the background or basal levels of activity adult individuals would accumulate in a day. Therefore a 1Pate RR, Pratt M, Blair SN, Haskell WL , Macera CA, Bouchard C et al. Phy sical activ ity and public health. A recommendation f rom the Centers f or Disease Control and Prev ention and the American College of Sports Medicine. Journal of Am en'can Medical Association 1995; 273(5):402-7. and U.S. Department of Health and Human Serv ices. Physical Activity and Health: A Report of the Surgeon General. Department of Health and Human Serv ices, Centers f or Disease Control and Prev ention, National Center f or Chronic Disease Prev ention and Health Promotion, The Presidents' Council on Phy sical Fitness and Sports: Atlanta, GA:USA. 1996.new, higher cutpoint is needed to describe the levels of physical activity associated with health benefits for measures such as IPAQ, which report on a broad range of domains of physical activity.…Hiah，This category was developed to describe higher levels of participation. Although it is known that greater health benefits are associated with increased levels of activity there is no consensus on the exact amount of activity for maximal benefit. In the absence of any established criteria, the IPAQ Research Committee proposes a measure which equates to approximately at least one hour per day or more, of at least moderate-intensity activity above the basal level of physical activity Considering that basal activity may be considered to be equivalent to approximately 5000 steps per day, it is proposed that “high active” category be considered as those who move at least 12,500 steps per day, or the equivalent in moderate and vigorous activities. This represents at least an hour more moderate-intensity activity over and above the basal level of activity, or half an hour of vigorous-intensity activity over and above basal levels daily. These calculations were based on emerging results of pedometers studies.2This category provides a higher threshold of measures of total physical activity and is a useful mechanism to distinguish variation in population groups. Also it could be used to set population targets for health-enhancing physical activity when multidomain instruments, such as IPAQ are used.2 Tudor-Locke C, Bassett DR Jr. How many steps/day are enough? Preliminary pedometer indices f or public health. Sports Med.2004;34(1):1-8.…Moderate，This category is defined as doing some activity, more than the low active category. It is proposed that it is a level of activity equivalent to “half an hour of at least moderate-intensity PA on most days”, the former leisure time-based physical activity population health recommendation.…Low，This category is simply defined as not meeting any of the criteria for either of the previous categories.5. Protocol for IPA Q Short Form5.1 Continuous ScoresMedian values and interquartile ranges can be computed for walking (W), moderate- intensity activities (M), vigorous-intensity activities (V) and a combined total physical activity score. All continuous scores are expressed in MET-minutes/week as defined below.5.2 MET Values and Formula for Computation of MET-minutes/weekThe selected MET values were derived from work undertaken during the IPAQ Reliability Study undertaken in 2000-20013. Using the Ainsworth et al. Compendium (Med Sci Sports Med 2000) an average MET score was derived for each type of activity. For example; all types of walking were included and an average MET value for walking was created. The same procedure was undertaken for moderate-intensity activities and vigorous-intensity activities. The following values continue to be used for the analysis of IPAQ data: Walking = 3.3 METs, Moderate PA = 4.0 METs and Vigorous PA = 8.0 METs. Using these values, four continuous scores are defined:Walking MET-minutes/week = 3.3 * walking minutes * walking days ModerateMET-minutes/week = 4.0 * moderate-intensity activity minutes * moderate days Vigorous MET-minutes/week = 8.0 * vigorous-intensity activity minutes * vigorous-intensity days Total physical activity MET-minutes/week = sum of Walking + Moderate + Vigorous MET- minutes/week scores.5.3 Categorical Score Category 1 LowThis is the lowest level of physical activity. Those individuals who not meet criteria for Categories 2 or 3 are considered to have a …low‟ physical activity level.The pattern of activity to be classified as …moderate‟ is either of the following criteria:a) 3 or more days of vigorous-intensity activity of at least 20 minutes per day ORb) 5 or more days of moderate-intensity activity and/or walking of at least 30minutes per dayORc) 5 or more days of any combination of walking, moderate-intensity or vigorousintensity activities achieving a minimum Total physical activity of at least 600 MET-minutes/week.3 Craig CL,Marshall A , Sjostrom M et al. International P hysical Activity Questionnaire: 12 country reliability and validity Med Sci Sports E xerc 2003;AugustCategory 2 ModerateIndividuals meeting at least one of the above criteria would be defined as accumulating a minimum level of activity and therefore be classified as …moderate‟. See Sect ion 7.5 for information about combining days across categories.Category 3 HighA separate category labelled …high‟ can be computed to describe higher levels of participation.The two criteria for classification as …high‟ are:a) vigorous-intensity activity on at least 3 days achieving a minimum Totalphysical activity of at least 1500 MET-minutes/weekORb) 7 or more days of any combination of walking, moderate-intensity orvigorous-intensity activities achieving a minimum Total physical activity of atleast 3000 MET-minutes/week.See Section 7.5 for information about combining days across categories.5.4 Sitting Question in IPA Q Short FormThe IPAQ sitting question is an additional indicator variable of time spent in sedentary activity and is not included as part of any summary score of physical activity. Data on sitting should be reported as median values and interquartile ranges. To-date there are few data on sedentary (sitting) behaviours and no well-accepted thresholds for data presented as categorical levels.6. Protocol for IPA Q Long FormThe long form of IPAQ asks in detail about walking, moderate-intensity and vigorous- intensity physical activity in each of the four domains. Note: asking more detailed questions regarding physical activity within domains is likely to produce higher prevalence estimates than the more generic IPAQ short form.4.0 * moderate-intensity activity minutes * moderate-intensity 8.0 * vigorous-intensity activity minutes * vigorous-intensity 6.1 Continuous ScoreData collected with the IPAQ long form can be reported as a continuous measure and reported as median MET-minutes. Median values and interquartile ranges can be computed for walking (W), moderate-intensity activities (M), and vigorous-intensity activities (V) within each domain using the formulas below. Total scores may also be calculated for walking (W), moderate-intensity activities (M), and vigorous-intensity activities (V); for each domain (work, transport, domestic and garden, and leisure) and for an overall grand total.6.2 MET Values and Formula for Computation of MET-minutes Work DomainWalking MET-minutes/week at work = 3.3 * walking minutes * walking days at workModerate MET-minutes/week at work= 4.0 * moderate-intensity activity minutes * moderate-intensity days at work Vigorous MET-minutes/week at work= 8.0 * vigorous-intensity activity minutes * vigorous-intensity days at work Total Work MET-minutes/week =sum of Walking + Moderate + Vigorous MET-minutes/week scores at work.Active Transportation DomainWalking MET-minutes/week for transport = 3.3 * walking minutes * walking days fortransportation Cycle MET-minutes/week for transport= 6.0 * cycling minutes * cycle days for transportation Total Transport MET-minutes/week = sum of Walking + CyclingMET-minutes/week scores for transportation. Domestic and Garden lYard Work] DomainVigorous MET-minutes/week yard chores= 5.5 * vigorous-intensity activity minutes * vigorous-intensity days doing yard work (Note: the MET value of 5.5 indicates that vigorous garden/yard work should be considered a moderate-intensity activity for scoring and computing total moderate intensity activities.) Moderate MET-minutes/week yard chores= 4.0 * moderate-intensity activity minutes * moderate- intensity days doing yard work Moderate MET-minutes/week inside chores= 3.0* moderate-intensity activity minutes * moderate- intensity days doing inside chores. Total Domestic and Garden MET-minutes/week =sum of Vigorous yard + Moderate yard + Moderate inside chores MET-minutes/week scores.Leisure-Time DomainWalking MET-minutes/week leisure = 3.3 * walking minutes * walking days in leisure Moderate MET-minutes/week leisure = days in leisure Vigorous MET-minutes/week leisure days in leisure Total Leisure-Time MET-minutes/week = sum of Walking + Moderate + Vigorous MET-minutes/week scores in leisure.Total Scores for all Walking, Moderate and Vigorous Physical ActivitiesTotal Walking MET-minutes/week = Walking MET-minutes/week (at Work + for Transport + in Leisure) Total Moderate MET-minutes/week total = Moderate MET-minutes/week (at Work + Yard chores + inside chores + in Leisure time) + Cycling Met-minutes/week for Transport + Vigorous Yard chores MET-minutes/weekTotal Vigorous MET-minutes/week = Vigorous MET-minutes/week (at Work + in Leisure)Note: Cycling MET value and Vigorous garden/yard work MET value fall within the coding range of moderate-intensity activities.Total Physical Activity ScoresAn overall total physical activity MET-minutes/week score can be computed as:Total physical activity MET-minutes/week = sum of Total (Walking + Moderate + Vigorous) MET- minutes/week scores.This is equivalent to computing:Total physical activity MET-minutes/week = sum of Total Work + Total Transport + Total Domestic and Garden + Total Leisure-Time MET-minutes/week scores.As there are no established thresholds for presenting MET-minutes, the IPAQ Research Committee proposes that these data are reported as comparisons of median values and interquartile ranges for different populations.6.3 Categorical ScoreAs noted earlier, regular participation is a key concept included in current public health guidelines for physical activity.4 Therefore, both the total volume and the number ofday/sessions are included in the IPAQ analysis algorithms. There are three levels of physical activity proposed to classify populations - …low‟, ‟moderate‟, and …high‟. T he criteria for these levels are the same as for the IPAQ short [described earlier in Section 4.2]Category 1 LowThis is the lowest level of physical activity. Those individuals who not meet criteria for Categories 2 or 3 are considered …low‟.Category 2 ModerateThe pattern of activity to be classified as …moderate‟ is either of the following criteria:d) 3 or more days of vigorous-intensity activity of at least 20 minutes per day ORe) 5 or more days of moderate-intensity activity and/or walking of at least 30minutes per dayOR4Pate RR, Pratt M, Blair SN, Haskell WL , Macera CA, Bouchard C et al. Phy sical activity and public health. A recommendation f rom the Centers f or Disease Control and Prev ention and the American College of Sports Medicine. Journal of Am erican Medical Association 1995; 273(5):402-7. and U.S. Department of Health and Human Serv ices. Physical Activity and Health: A Report of the Surgeon General. Department of Health and Human Serv ices, Centers f or Disease Control and Prev ention, National Center f or Chronic Disease Prev ention and Health Promotion, The Presidents' Council on Physical Fitness and Sports: Atlanta, GA:USA. 1996.ORb) f) 5 or more days of any combination of walking, moderate-intensity or vigorous- intensityactivities achieving a minimum Total physical activity of at least 600 MET-minutes/week. Individuals meeting at least one of the above criteria would be defined as accumulating a moderate level of activity. See Section 7.5 for information about combining days across categories.Category 3 HighA separate category labelled …high‟ can be computed to describe higher levels of participation. The two criteria for classification as …high‟ are:a) vigorous-intensity activity on at least 3 days achieving a minimum Total physicalactivity of at least 1500 MET-minutes/week 7 or more days of any combination of walking, moderate-intensity orvigorous-intensity activities achieving a minimum Total physical activity of atleast 3000 MET-minutes/week.See Section 7.5 for information about combining days across categories.6.4 IPA Q Sitting Question IPA Q Long FormThe IPAQ sitting question is an additional indicator variable and is not included as part of any summary score of physical activity. To-date there are few data on sedentary (sitting) behaviours and no well-accepted thresholds for data presented as categorical levels. For the sitting question …Minutes‟ is used as the indicator to reflect time spent in sitting rather thanMET-minutes which would suggest an estimate of energy expenditure.IPAQ long assesses an estimate of sitting on a typical weekday, weekend day and time spent sitting during travel (see transport domain questions).Summary sitting variables includeSitting Total Minutes/week = weekday sitting minutes* 5 weekdays + weekend day sitting minutes* 2 weekend daysAverage Sitting Total Minutes/day = (weekday sitting minutes* 5 weekdays + weekend day sitting minutes* 2 weekend days) / 7Note: The above calculation of …Sitting Total‟ excludes time spent sitting during travel because the introduction in IPAQ long directs the responder to NOT include this component as it would have already been captured under the Transport section. If a summary sitting variable including time spent sitting for transport is required, it should be calculated by adding the time reported (travelling in a motor vehicle) under transport to the above formula. Care should be taken in reporting these alternate data to clearly distinguish the …total sitting‟ variable from a …total sitting - including transport‟ variable.Data Processing RulesIn addition to a standardized approach to computing categorical and continuous measures of physical activity, it is necessary to undertake standard methods for the cleaning and treatment of IPAQ datasets. The use of different approaches and rules would introduce variability and reduce the comparability of data.There are no established rules for data cleaning and processing on physical activity. Thus, to allow more accurate comparisons across studies IPAQ Research Committee has established and recommends the following guidelines:7.1 Data CleaningI. Any responses to duration (time) provided in the hours and minutes response optionshould be converted from hours and minutes into minutes.II. To ensure that responses in …minutes‟ were not entered in the …hours‟ column by mistake during self-co mpletion or during data entry process, values of …15‟，…30’，…45‟，…60‟ and …90‟ in the …hours‟ column should be converted to …15‟，…30‟，…45‟，…60‟ and …90‟ minutes, respectively, in the minutes column.III. In some cases duration (time) will be reported as weekly (not daily) e.g., VWHRS, VWMINS. These data should be converted into an average daily time by dividing by 7. IV. If …don‟t know‟ or …refused … or data are missing for time or days then that case is removed from analysis.Note: Both the number of days and daily time are required for the creation ofcategorical and continuous summary variables7.2 Maximum Values for Excluding OutliersThis rule is to exclude data which are unreasonably high; these data are to be considered outliers and thus are excluded from analysis. All cases in which the sum total of all Walking, Moderate and Vigorous time variables is greater than 960 minutes (16 hours) should be excluded from the analysis. This assumes that on average an individual of 8 hours per day is spent sleeping.The …days‟ variables can take the range 0-7 days, or 8, 9 (don‟t know or refused); values greater than 9 should not be allowed and those cases excluded from analysis.7.3 Minimum Values for Duration of A ctivityOnly values of 10 or more minutes of activity should be included in the calculation of summary scores. The rationale being that the scientific evidence indicates that episodes or bouts of at least 10 minutes are required to achieve health benefits. Responses of less than 10 minutes [and their associated days] should be re-coded to …zero‟.This rule attempts to normalize the distribution of levels of activity which are usually skewed in national or large population data sets.In IPAQ short - it is recommended that all Walking, Moderate and Vigorous time variables exceeding ... 3 hours‟ or ...180 minutes‟ are truncated (that is re-coded) to be equal to (180)7.4 Truncation of Data Rulesminutes‟ in a new variable. This rule permits a maximum of 21 hours of activ ity in a week to be reported for each category (3 hours * 7 days).In IPAQ long - the truncation process is more complicated, but to be consistent with the approach for IPAQ short requires that the variables total Walking, total Moderate- intensity and total Vigorous-intensity activity are calculated and then, for each of these summed behaviours, the total value should be truncated to 3 hours (180 minutes).When analysing the data as categorical variable or presenting median and interquartile ranges of the MET-minute scores, the application of the truncation rule will not affect the results. This rule does have the important effect of preventing misclassification in the …high‟ category. For example, an individual who reports walking for 10 minutes on 6 days and 12 hours of moderate activity on one day could be coded as …high‟ because this pattern meets the …7 day” and “3000 MET-min” criteria for …high‟. However, this uncommon pattern of activity is unlikely to yield the health benefits that the …high‟ categor y is intended to represent. Although using median is recommended due to the skewed distribution of scores, if IPAQ data are analysed and presented as a continuous variable using mean values, the application of the truncation rule will produce slightly lower mean values than would otherwise be obtained.7.5 Calculating MET-minute/week ScoresData processing rules 7.2, 7.3, and 7.4 deals first with excluding outlier data, then secondly, with recoding minimum values and then finally dealing with high values. These rules will ensure that highly active people remain classified as …high‟, while decreasing the chances that less active individuals are misclassified and coded as …high‟.Using the resulting variables, convert time and days to MET-minute/week scores [see above Sections 5.2 and 6.2; METS x days x daily time].7.6 Calculating Total Days for Presenting Categorical Data on Moderate and HighLevelsPresenting IPAQ data using categorical variables requires the total number of …days‟ on which all physical activity was undertaken to be assessed. This is difficult because frequency in …days‟ is asked separately for walking, moderate-intensity and vigorous- intensity activities, thus allowing the total number of …days‟ to range from a minimumof 0 to a maximum of 21‟days‟ per week in IPAQ short and higher in IPAQ long. The IPAQ instrument does not record if different types of activity are undertaken on the same day.In calculating …moderately active‟, the primary requirement is to identify those individuals who undertake activity on at least …5days‟/week [see Sections 4.2 and 5.3]. Indi viduals who meet this criterion should be coded in a new variable called “at least five days” and this variable should be used to identify those meeting criterion b) at least 30 minutes of moderate-intensity activity and/or walking; and those meeting criterion c) any combination of walking, moderate-intensity or vigorous-intensity activities achieving a minimum of 600MET-minutes/week.APPENDIX 1 Below are two examples showing this coding in practice:i) an individual who reports …2 days of moderate -intensity‟ and …3 days of walking‟ should be coded as a value indicating “at least five days”;ii) an individual reporting …2 days of vigorous -intensity‟, …2 days of moderate -intensity‟ and …2 days of walking should be coded as a value to indicate “at leastfive days” [even though the actual total is 6].The original frequency of …days‟ for each type of activity should remain in the data file for usein the other calculations.The same approach as described above is used to calculate total days for computing the…high‟ category. The primary requirement according to the stated criteria is to identify thoseindividuals who undertake a combination of walking, moderate-intensity and or vigorous-intensity activity on at least 7 days/week [See section 4.2].Individuals who meet this criterion should be coded as a value in a new variable to reflect “atleast 7 days".Below are two examples showing this coding in practice:i) an individual who reports …4 days of moderate -intensity‟ and …3 days of walking‟ shouldbe coded as the new variable “at least 7 days".ii) an individual reporting …3 days of vigorous -intensity‟, …3 days moderate - intensity‟ and…3 days walking‟ should be coded as “at least 7 days" [even though the total adds to9] .8. Summary algorithmsThe algorithms in Appendix 1 and Appendix 2 to this document show how these rules work inan analysis plan, to develop the categories 1 [Low], 2 [Moderate], and 3 [High] levels ofactivity.IPA Q Research CommitteeNovember 2005。

护士工作压力源量表

护士工作压力源量表Revised at 2 pm on December 25, 2020.
1~4级评分法。

分数越高，表明引起压力的程度越大
表1护士工作压力源
条目
I-护理专业及工作方面的问题
1、护理工作的社会地位太低
2、继续深造的机会太少
3、工资及其他的福利待遇低
4、晋升的机会太少
5、经常倒班
6、工作中的独立性少
7、工作分工不明确
II-工作量及时间分配问题
1、工作量太大
2、上班的护士数量少
3、没有时同对病人实施心理护理
4、非护理性的工作太多
5、无用的书面工作太多
III-工作环境及资源方面的问题
1、工作环境差
2、工作中所需的仪器设备不足
3、病区拥挤
IV.病人护理方面的问题
1、扌日心工作中出现差错事故
2、护士工作未被病人及家属承认
3、护理的病人病情过重
4、病人的家属不礼貌
5、病人的要求太咼或太过分
6、病人不札貌
7、病人不音作
8、所学的知识不能满足病人及家属的心理需要
9、缺乏病人教育的有关知识
10、担心护理操作会引起病人的疼痛
11、护理的病人突然死亡
V.管理及人际关系方面的问题
1、缺乏其他卫生工作人员的理解及尊重
2、护理管理者的理解与支持不够
3、护理管理者的批评过多
4、医生对护理工作过分挑剔
5、同事之问缺乏理解与支持
6、与护理管理者发生冲安
7、与病区的某些护士工作很难
8、与医生发生冲突
9、同事之同缺乏友好合作的气氛。

改良Ashworth和Tardieu量表

Modified Ashworth Scale
Purpose of the measure
The Modified Ashworth Scale is considered the primary clinical measure of muscle spasticity in patients with neurological conditions. However, some publications question its ability to measure spasticity and advocate the Modified Ashworth Scale as a rating scale to measure abnormality in tone or the resistance to passive movements, since there is no clinically direct method for measuring spasticity (Gregson, Leathley, Moore, Sharma, Smith & Watkins, 1999; Pandyan, Johnson, Price, Curless, Barnes & Rodgers, 1999).
Available versions
The Ashworth Scale was initially developed in the early 1960s by Bryan Ashworth, to estimate the efficclients with Multiple Sclerosis. It is a 5-point scale, with a grade score of 0, 1, 2, 3, or 4 (Ashworth, 1964). In 1987, Bohannon and Smith added the grade "1+" and

焦虑与抑郁量表整理

焦虑与抑郁量表整理量表来源：1、《心理卫生评定量表手册》2、《心理卫生评定量表手册增订版》3、《精神卫生评定量表手册》汇总量表内容：包括以下几方面：量表作者，量表的信效度，量表评定的适宜人群，量表的标准化评定方法及注意事项，量表的评分分析（即与情绪情感的关系），最后呈现整个量表的内容。

量表一：Beck焦虑量表(BAI) 贝克焦虑量表(BecK Anxiety Inventory)由美国阿隆.贝克（AaronT.Beck）等于1985年编制，是一个含有21个项目的自评量表。

该量表用4级评分，主要评定受试者被多种焦虑症状烦扰的程度。

适用于具有焦虑的成年人，能比较准确的反应主观感受到的焦虑。

一、项目和评分标准BAI有21个自评项目，把受试者被多种焦虑症状烦扰的程度作为评定指标，采用4级分方法。

其标准为"1"表示无；"2"表示轻度，无大的烦恼；"3"表示中度，感到不适但尚能忍收；"4"表示重度，只能勉强忍受。

二、适用范围BAI 主要适用具有焦虑的成人。

在心理门诊，精神科或住院病人中均可应用。

三、评定方法以及注意事项量表均由评定对象自行填写。

在填表前应向填写者交代清楚填写方法及每题的含义，要求独立完成。

需要注意的方面有：1、评定时间范围应是"现在"或"最近一周"内的自我体验。

2、应仔细检查评定结果，不要漏项或重复评定。

3、可随临床诊治或研究需要反复评定一般间隔时间至少一周。

四、结果分析BAI分析方法简单。

把21项分数相加，得到粗分，再通过公式Y=int(1.19x)取整数后转换成标准分。

五、应用评价1、BAI是一种相当简单的临床工具。

它的特点是项目内容简明，容易理解，操作分析方便。

2、信度：用BAI对60名焦虑患者及80名健康人作检查，并把结果的总分作t检验，结果表明两组BAI 的评分有显著的差异（p<0.01）。

五级量表

前几天写过一个研究报告，为某“产品”设计了20余个属性，研究被试的重要性感知
，数据出来以后换算成100分，结果20余个属性基本都在80-85分之间，很多属性只有小数点后的差异，勉强写了个重要性排序。幸亏大家都在用这种方法，客户可能也习惯了，没说什么。但感觉这种分析实在没多大意义，而且还有产生误导的可能。（看了一下统计数据，选择两个否定选项的样本只有2%左右）
Ashura:
实际上这个问题也就是数据的偏态分布的问题。改进有些来自于测试方法或者量表上的创新，比如，量表将一般到满意之间的评价增加，使得被访者更好的从满意的状态中区分出自己属于哪一个层次，但问题是，即使这样，也很难真正消除偏态的状态。
个人认为非线性的数据理解有助于更好的解决这个问题。传统上，我们在做满意度研究的时候，喜欢把满意度理解成一维的，线性的分布，但是，从kano模型的贡献来看，数据的非线性关系将能更好的解释消费者的满意度状况。
希望大家提提意见，谢谢！
Ashura：
多谢dreamhawk，开了个好话题：）
本来开了这个版之后一直打算写一个话题来大家讨论的，但最近工作实在太忙了。。。呵呵。没有时间细细讲，但一个思路是，消费者的“满意”的态度和“不满意”态度根本就不是一码事。换成统计的话，满意和不满意之间根本不是一个连续的、线性的关系。
最后，关于答题人有选择“非常和比较满意”的倾向。这是对的。在纸笔或网络访问中，答题人还有选择较先看到的选项的倾向。所以，我们往往把消极选项列在前面，积极选项列在后面(从非常不满意开始，到非常满意结束)，以减轻这个问题。在电话访问中，一般我们不做任何调整。因为，研究表明，答题人有选择最后听到的选项的倾向。两者中和了。
问卷印刷要注意，问卷上的线长度要跟设计好的长度一样长短；如果没有扫描仪器的话，反正中国劳动力便宜，叫几个访问员用尺子量一下，标出得分即可（精确到mm就可以了）。

AT量表

ATICE评分(重症监护环境优化量表)

霍兰德职业兴趣测试量表 英文版

儿童社交反应量表教师版分数

消费者行为学量表精选

常模。详见附录五学习适应量表上海...

简版无法忍受不确定性量表在中学生中应用的效度和信度

改良Ashworth和Tardieu量表

列举评比量表

脑卒中常用量表

最新国际原子量表(字母排序)

工作特征量表中文版

能谱的wt%和at%

国际体力活动量表评分标准（内含中文版）

护士工作压力源量表

改良Ashworth和Tardieu量表

焦虑与抑郁量表整理

五级量表

霍兰德职业兴趣测试量表英文版