Assessment screening and severity tools
Screening tools
A large number of standardised self-report and interviewbased
measures are available to clinicians. There is longstanding
debate about the superiority of interviews as
opposed to self-report measures (whether paper and
pencil or computerised), and ultimately the selection of
any measure will depend on the purpose and context of
assessment, along with constraints on time, availability
of training and clinical factors. These issues are now
discussed.
Self-report questionnaires are easy and quick to administer,
although they differ in their utility. Shorter
measures such as the Eating Attitudes Test (EAT-12;
EAT-26) [50] and SCOFF [10] are useful in primary care
situations where an ED may be suspected (NICE Guidelines;
Allen et al., 2011), and identifying the need for second
screening steps is a focus. However these are less
useful in specialist settings where the more relevant task
is to gather systematic information about severity and
the extent of psychopathology. Here, longer self-report
measures (for example, Eating Disorder Inventory (EDI-3)
[51], Eating Disorder Examination Questionnaire (EDE-Q)
[52], and Yale-Brown-Cornell Eating Disorders Scale
(YBC-EDS, [53]) tend to assess two factors - a combination
of risk factors and psychological disturbances associated
with AN [54]. Detailed information about
psychological symptoms can be elicited from these,
which in turn adds to any clinical formulations. As
standardised measures, they can be useful in assessing
symptom change.
Assessment screening and severity toolsScreening toolsA large number of standardised self-report and interviewbasedmeasures are available to clinicians. There is longstandingdebate about the superiority of interviews asopposed to self-report measures (whether paper andpencil or computerised), and ultimately the selection ofany measure will depend on the purpose and context ofassessment, along with constraints on time, availabilityof training and clinical factors. These issues are nowdiscussed.Self-report questionnaires are easy and quick to administer,although they differ in their utility. Shortermeasures such as the Eating Attitudes Test (EAT-12;EAT-26) [50] and SCOFF [10] are useful in primary caresituations where an ED may be suspected (NICE Guidelines;Allen et al., 2011), and identifying the need for secondscreening steps is a focus. However these are lessuseful in specialist settings where the more relevant taskis to gather systematic information about severity andthe extent of psychopathology. Here, longer self-reportmeasures (for example, Eating Disorder Inventory (EDI-3)[51], Eating Disorder Examination Questionnaire (EDE-Q)[52], and Yale-Brown-Cornell Eating Disorders Scale(YBC-EDS, [53]) tend to assess two factors - a combinationof risk factors and psychological disturbances associatedwith AN [54]. Detailed information aboutpsychological symptoms can be elicited from these,which in turn adds to any clinical formulations. Asstandardised measures, they can be useful in assessingsymptom change.
การแปล กรุณารอสักครู่..
