Price Jason P
South Tees Hospitals NHS Trust, Middlesbrough, UK.
Br J Clin Psychol. 2009 Jun;48(Pt 2):109-23. doi: 10.1348/014466508X366713. Epub 2008 Oct 14.
To investigate the clinical and theoretical validity of a new computerized test of visual working memory; the computerized object and abstract designs (COAD) test. The COAD test was designed to be consistent with Baddeley's inclusion of the 'episodic buffer' in the 'multicomponent model' of working memory.
A cross-sectional design was used with two brain lesion groups (left N=9 and right hemisphere N=12) and a control group N=18. The participants had to complete the new test, along with standardized tests of visual working memory in current clinical use (visual patterns test and spatial span test). Differences between groups, as well as between tests were investigated. Correlations were performed across tests. Regression models were used to further evaluate the COAD clinical sensitivity in comparison with the other tests of visual working memory.
Significant differences were observed, as predicted, between groups and between design types. The COAD test was significantly correlated with both the visual patterns Test and the spatial span test. The COAD test also proved to be more sensitive in detecting brain injury resulting in visual working memory deficits, than the standardized tests.
The results are discussed in relation to the COAD test's potential utility in the early detection of specific degenerative neurological disorders as well as the potential to be used in identifying deficits in visual working memory and in neurorehabilitation. It is concluded that the COAD test is a clinically valid psychometric test and is a more sensitive instrument than current standardized tests of visual working memory in clinical use.
研究一种新的视觉工作记忆计算机化测试——计算机化物体与抽象设计(COAD)测试的临床及理论效度。COAD测试的设计与巴德利工作记忆“多成分模型”中纳入的“情景缓冲器”相一致。
采用横断面设计,包括两个脑损伤组(左半球n = 9,右半球n = 12)和一个对照组n = 18。参与者必须完成这项新测试,以及当前临床使用的视觉工作记忆标准化测试(视觉模式测试和空间广度测试)。研究了组间以及测试之间的差异。对各项测试进行了相关性分析。使用回归模型进一步评估COAD与其他视觉工作记忆测试相比的临床敏感性。
正如预期的那样,在组间和设计类型之间观察到了显著差异。COAD测试与视觉模式测试和空间广度测试均显著相关。与标准化测试相比,COAD测试在检测导致视觉工作记忆缺陷的脑损伤方面也更敏感。
讨论了这些结果与COAD测试在早期检测特定退行性神经疾病中的潜在效用,以及在识别视觉工作记忆缺陷和神经康复中的潜在用途。结论是,COAD测试是一种具有临床效度的心理测量测试,并且在临床使用中比当前的视觉工作记忆标准化测试更敏感。