注意力不足過動症知識量表之發展及信效度評估

Development and evaluation of the validity and reliability of a questionnaire to determine knowledge about attention-deficit / hyperactivity disorder (ADHD)

目標：發展一份適用於國小老師及一般家長的注意力不足過動症ADHD知識量表，並作信效度評估。方法：量表共10題，包括ADHD症狀、ADHD的出現年齡、流行特質、延誤就醫後果、可能致因、症狀持續、治療方式、停藥時機、行為治療及教師、家長可幫助患童的地方。採專家效度、已知團體差異的建構效度、項目分析、內在一致性、再測信度。研究樣本為參加新北市ADHD衛教活動的國小教師（563位）和一般家長（102位）。結果：專家效度（16位）的CVI=85.0%。項目分析方面，難度指數在29.1%至87.2%間（教師）、46.6%至68.6%間（家長），鑑別指數在24.3%至57.9%間（教師）、55.7%至89.2%間（家長）。教師的答對率(71.4%)顯著優於家長(59.0%)，顯示具已知團體差異的建構效度。Cronbach's α為0.52（教師）、0.69（家長）。22位教師及21位家長在兩週內填寫量表兩次，多落在95%一致性區間內，及沒有特別形態。結論：ADHD知識量表題數精簡，內容涵蓋範圍廣，具良好信效度，可作為測量教師、家長的ADHD知識，及評估衛教對於ADHD知識的增進成效。

Objectives: The aims of this study were to develop a questionnaire to determine knowledge about attention-deficit / hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) of primary school teachers and parents (not necessarily those with an ADHD child), and to evaluate its validity and reliability. Methods: The study sample consisted of primary school teachers (n=563) and parents (n=102) who participated in ADHD education activities in New Taipei City. The 10 items on the questionnaire included signs, age of onset, epidemiologic characteristics, consequences if treatment were delayed, possible causes, means of treatment, when to stop medication, behavior therapy, and how teachers or parents can help ADHD children. Validity (including expert validity, item analysis, and known-group differences of construct validity) and reliability (including internal consistence and test-retest reliability) were assessed. Results: The mean content validity index (CVI) was 85% for 16 experts. The indices of difficulty were 29.1%-87.2% for teachers and 46.6%-68.6% for parents. The indices of discrimination were 24.3%-57.9% for teachers and 55.7%-89.2% for parents. The mean percentage of correct answers was 71.4% for teachers; this was significantly higher than that of parents (59.0%). Cronbach's α was 0.52 for teachers and 0.69 for parents. A total of 22 teachers and 21 parents completed the questionnaire twice in two weeks. Most of the data were within the 95% limit of agreement and there was no particular pattern. Conclusions: Our questionnaire is brief and covers many items, and it has acceptable psychometric properties. It can be used to assess the ADHD knowledge of teachers and parents, and can also be used to evaluate the educational effects of an ADHD lecture.