| There are many researches on the development of IAD scale in the past,but in the clinical use and research,which one to choose is always at a loss.How to select a suitable and effective questionnaire for clinical diagnosis and treatment and clinical research is an urgent problem to be solved.Therefore,it is necessary to compare these IAD scales in order to select the appropriate tool to use.But so far,previous studies have not used a systematic standard for comparison.Systematic evaluation is a new method of literature synthesis,it refers to the systematic and comprehensive collection of all published and unpublished clinical studies on a specific clinical problem,and the selection of the literature that meets the quality standards by applying the principles and methods of clinical epidemiology to strictly evaluate the literature,qualitative or quantitative synthesis,to draw comprehensive and reliable conclusions.Therefore,this paper reviews the literature related to the development and development of the IAD scale by using the system evaluation method.And through the standardized procedure,so as to achieve the performance of the scale comparison,and then the measurement of superior performance of the tools.The literature related to the development and development of the IAD scale was screened by using the latest Cosmin performance measurement system evaluation tool.From 3823 articles and their references,91 articles were selected,35 tools for measuring Internet addiction.To evaluate the quality of the methodology and the performance of the scale and summarize the quality of the evidence by risk bias list,the latest standard of good measurement performance,and the improved version of the GRADE method,Finally,35 Internet addiction tools were divided into three grades:A,B and C.In Study 2,the IAT scale was analyzed with confidence-unit.The results showed that APIUS,IAD questionnaire,OCS,pathological Internet use questionnaire,IAT,CIUS,DCT-IA all had sufficient content validity and there is at least low-quality evidence that its internal consistency is adequacy.CIAS-R,Internet addiction tendency questionnaire for college students,IADDS,Internet addiction scale for middle school students-1,GPIUS,IADQ,the consequences ofInternet use,the diagnostic criteria of pathological Internet use,Internet addiction scale for middle school students-2,Internet addiction scale for college students,Internet dependence tendency scale for college students,Network dependence diagnostic scale,Internet addiction diagnosis scale for middle school students,Internet addiction scale for college students,Self-rating scale for Internet use,Internet addiction disorder scale for college students,PIUQ-1?PRIUSS?IDS-15 did not evaluate content validity or lack of internal consistency,which measurement performance and evidence quality of the scale need further study.IAPT,internet addiction disorder identification questionnaire for adolescents,Internet addiction inventory for junior middle school students,PIUQ-2,IAST,UADI,APIINT,K-Scale have high quality evidence to prove that its measurement performance is adequacy.IAT also has high internal consistency and test-retest reliability after meta-analysis reliability is combined,which is consistent with the results of the study according to the evaluation criteria.Based on the results of the study,we conclude that:The recommended scales are APIUS,Internet addiction tendency questionnaire,OCS,pathological Internet use questionnaire,IAT,CIUS,DCT-IA,and the results obtained by these scales can be trusted.On the whole,APIUS,IAT and DCT-IA have good performance,and the most excellent performance is DCT-IA.3.The APIUS scale is suitable for young people,the questionnaire of college students' Internet addiction tendency and the questionnaire of college students' pathological Internet use are suitable for college students,and the OCS scale,IAT scale and CIUS scale are more widely used in the target population,for teenagers and adults.DCT-IA is suitable for people aged 12 ~ 36. |
PDF Full Text Request