ScholarGate
助手

方法对比

并排查看您选择的方法;存在差异的行会高亮显示。

Rapid Assessment Instrument×Standardized Clinical Cutoff×
领域Social WorkSocial Work
方法族Process / pipelineProcess / pipeline
起源年份20021991
提出者Walter W. Hudson and the clinical-measurement tradition; codified by Springer, Abell & HudsonNeil S. Jacobson & Paula Truax
类型Brief, standardized, self-report measure for repeated use in practiceMethod for judging whether individual change on a standardized measure is reliable and clinically meaningful
开创性文献Springer, D. W., Abell, N., & Hudson, W. W. (2002). Creating and validating rapid assessment instruments for practice and research: Part 1. Research on Social Work Practice, 12(3), 408–439. DOI ↗Jacobson, N. S., & Truax, P. (1991). Clinical significance: A statistical approach to defining meaningful change in psychotherapy research. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 59(1), 12–19. DOI ↗
别名RAI, Rapid Assessment Instruments, Brief Standardized Self-Report Scale, Clinical Measurement Package ScalesClinical Cutoff Score, Clinical Significance Method, Reliable Change Index, Jacobson-Truax Method
相关43
摘要A rapid assessment instrument (RAI) is a short, standardized, self-report measure designed to be completed quickly and repeatedly so that a social worker can assess the magnitude of a client's problem, compare it against a validated clinical cutoff, and monitor change over the course of an intervention. The format was championed by Walter Hudson, whose Clinical Measurement Package scales set the template, and was systematized for practitioners by Springer, Abell, and Hudson, who laid out how to create and validate such instruments for practice and research.The standardized clinical cutoff approach, developed by Jacobson and Truax, judges whether an individual client's change on a standardized measure is both statistically reliable and clinically meaningful. It pairs a Reliable Change Index — which asks whether a pre-to-post change is larger than the measurement error of the instrument — with a cutoff score that marks the boundary between the dysfunctional and functional (normal) populations. A client who moves reliably across that cutoff is counted as recovered, giving practice and research a defensible, individual-level definition of meaningful improvement.
ScholarGate数据集
  1. v1
  2. 2 来源
  3. PUBLISHED
  1. v1
  2. 2 来源
  3. PUBLISHED

前往搜索 下载幻灯片

ScholarGate方法对比: Rapid Assessment Instrument · Standardized Clinical Cutoff. 于 2026-06-25 检索自 https://scholargate.app/zh/compare