This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Hinds, P. S. Articles by Srivastava, D. K. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Hinds, P. S. Articles by Srivastava, D. K. Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Is Clinical Relevance Sometimes Lost in Summative Scores?

St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital

Lisa Schum

St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital

Deo Kumar Srivastava

St. Jude Children’s Hospital

It is possible to have a reliable and valid measure of a clinical phenomenon but to score the measure in a way that inaccurately represents the clinical meaning of the measured phenomenon. The purpose of this article is to demonstrate the risk to research and clinical assessments caused by a discrepancy in the clinical meaning of scores obtained by total scale scoring and those obtained by individual item scoring. The clinical phenomenon that is used in this demonstration is symptom distress as measured by the Symptom Distress Scale (SDS). In this example, the discrepancy in meaning between total scale scores and the individual item scores of the SDS has potential clinical implications as more than 30% of participating adolescent patients at each of four time points spanning a 6-month time period would have been inaccurately assessed when the assessment was based on the total scale score.

Western Journal of Nursing Research, Vol. 24, No. 4, 345-353 (2002)
DOI: 10.1177/01945902024004004


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?