• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

波士顿命名测试项目在连续临床系列中的难度和歧视参数。

Difficulty and discrimination parameters of Boston naming test items in a consecutive clinical series.

机构信息

Department of Psychiatry and Psychology, Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, FL 32224, USA.

出版信息

Arch Clin Neuropsychol. 2011 Aug;26(5):434-44. doi: 10.1093/arclin/acr042. Epub 2011 May 18.

DOI:10.1093/arclin/acr042
PMID:21593059
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3142950/
Abstract

The Boston Naming Test is one of the most widely used neuropsychological instruments; yet, there has been limited use of modern psychometric methods to investigate its properties at the item level. The current study used Item response theory to examine each item's difficulty and discrimination properties, as well as the test's measurement precision across the range of naming ability. Participants included 300 consecutive referrals to the outpatient neuropsychology service at Mayo Clinic in Florida. Results showed that successive items do not necessarily reflect a monotonic increase in psychometric difficulty, some items are inadequate to distinguish individuals at various levels of naming ability, multiple items provide redundant psychometric information, and measurement precision is greatest for persons within a low-average range of ability. These findings may be used to develop short forms, improve reliability in future test versions by replacing psychometrically poor items, and analyze profiles of intra-individual variability.

摘要

波士顿命名测试是最广泛使用的神经心理学工具之一;然而,在项目层面上,很少使用现代心理测量方法来研究其特性。本研究使用项目反应理论来检查每个项目的难度和区分度特性,以及测试在命名能力范围内的测量精度。参与者包括佛罗里达州梅奥诊所门诊神经心理学服务的 300 名连续转诊患者。结果表明,连续的项目不一定反映心理测量难度的单调递增,有些项目不足以区分不同命名能力水平的个体,多个项目提供冗余的心理测量信息,并且在能力的低平均范围内,测量精度最大。这些发现可用于开发简短形式,通过替换心理测量较差的项目来提高未来测试版本的可靠性,并分析个体内变异性的分布。

相似文献

1
Difficulty and discrimination parameters of Boston naming test items in a consecutive clinical series.波士顿命名测试项目在连续临床系列中的难度和歧视参数。
Arch Clin Neuropsychol. 2011 Aug;26(5):434-44. doi: 10.1093/arclin/acr042. Epub 2011 May 18.
2
Limitations of true score variance to measure discriminating power: psychometric simulation study.真分数方差衡量判别力的局限性:心理测量学模拟研究。
J Abnorm Psychol. 2010 May;119(2):300-6. doi: 10.1037/a0018400.
3
Development of a short form of the Boston naming test for individuals with aphasia.失语症个体波士顿命名测验简短版的编制。
J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2011 Aug;54(4):1089-100. doi: 10.1044/1092-4388(2010/09-0119). Epub 2010 Dec 20.
4
Psychometric properties of the benton visual form discrimination test.本顿视觉形式辨别测验的心理测量特性。
Appl Neuropsychol. 2005;12(1):19-23. doi: 10.1207/s15324826an1201_4.
5
Item analysis of three Spanish naming tests: a cross-cultural investigation.三项西班牙语命名测试的项目分析:一项跨文化调查。
NeuroRehabilitation. 2009;24(1):75-85. doi: 10.3233/NRE-2009-0456.
6
THE DEPRESSION INVENTORY DEVELOPMENT SCALE: Assessment of Psychometric Properties Using Classical and Modern Measurement Theory in a CAN-BIND Trial.抑郁量表发展量表:在CAN - BIND试验中使用经典和现代测量理论对心理测量特性进行评估
Innov Clin Neurosci. 2020 Jul 1;17(7-9):30-40.
7
Parallel short forms for the Boston Naming Test: psychometric properties and norms for older adults.波士顿命名测试的平行简版:老年人的心理测量特性及常模
J Clin Exp Neuropsychol. 1998 Dec;20(6):828-34. doi: 10.1076/jcen.20.6.828.1105.
8
[The estimation of premorbid intelligence levels in French speakers].[法语使用者病前智力水平的评估]
Encephale. 2005 Jan-Feb;31(1 Pt 1):31-43. doi: 10.1016/s0013-7006(05)82370-x.
9
Caution warranted in extrapolating from Boston Naming Test item gradation construct.从波士顿命名测试项目分级结构进行推断时需谨慎。
Appl Neuropsychol Adult. 2017 Jan-Feb;24(1):65-72. doi: 10.1080/23279095.2015.1089505. Epub 2016 Mar 15.
10
Is the Boston Naming Test still fit for purpose?波士顿命名测验是否仍然适用?
Clin Neuropsychol. 2014;28(3):486-504. doi: 10.1080/13854046.2014.892155. Epub 2014 Mar 7.

引用本文的文献

1
Neuropsychological Tests of Memory, Visuospatial, and Language Function in Parkinson's Disease: Review, Critique, and Recommendations.帕金森病记忆、视觉空间和语言功能的神经心理学测试:综述、批判与建议
Mov Disord. 2025 May;40(5):795-806. doi: 10.1002/mds.30166. Epub 2025 Mar 27.
2
Establishing and evaluating the gradient of item naming difficulty in post-stroke aphasia and semantic dementia.建立和评估脑卒中后失语症和语义性痴呆患者命名项目难度的梯度。
Cortex. 2024 Oct;179:103-111. doi: 10.1016/j.cortex.2024.07.007. Epub 2024 Aug 10.
3
Proof of Reliability Convergence to 1 at Rate of Spearman-Brown Formula for Random Test Forms and Irrespective of Item Pool Dimensionality.信度收敛证明达到斯皮尔曼-布朗公式速率,适用于随机测试形式且与项目库维度无关。
Psychometrika. 2024 Sep;89(3):774-795. doi: 10.1007/s11336-024-09956-7. Epub 2024 Mar 12.
4
A Color-Picture Version of Boston Naming Test Outperformed the Black-and-White Version in Discriminating Amnestic Mild Cognitive Impairment and Mild Alzheimer's Disease.在区分遗忘型轻度认知障碍和轻度阿尔茨海默病方面,波士顿命名测试的彩色图片版比黑白版表现更优。
Front Neurol. 2022 Apr 25;13:884460. doi: 10.3389/fneur.2022.884460. eCollection 2022.
5
Bayesian modeling of item heterogeneity in dichotomous recognition memory data and prospects for computerized adaptive testing.二项式识别记忆数据中项目异质性的贝叶斯建模与计算机化自适应测试的前景。
Sci Rep. 2022 Jan 24;12(1):1250. doi: 10.1038/s41598-022-04997-3.
6
Enhancing the Efficiency of Confrontation Naming Assessment for Aphasia Using Computer Adaptive Testing.利用计算机自适应测试提高失语症面命名评估的效率。
J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2019 Jun 19;62(6):1724-1738. doi: 10.1044/2018_JSLHR-L-18-0344. Epub 2019 Jun 3.
7
Advances in applications of item response theory to clinical assessment.项目反应理论在临床评估中的应用进展。
Psychol Assess. 2019 Dec;31(12):1442-1455. doi: 10.1037/pas0000597. Epub 2019 Mar 14.
8
A signal detection-item response theory model for evaluating neuropsychological measures.一种用于评估神经心理学测量的信号检测-项目反应理论模型。
J Clin Exp Neuropsychol. 2018 Oct;40(8):745-760. doi: 10.1080/13803395.2018.1427699. Epub 2018 Feb 5.

本文引用的文献

1
Differential item functioning of the Boston Naming Test in cognitively normal African American and Caucasian older adults.波士顿命名测试在认知正常的非裔美国老年人和白人老年人中的项目功能差异。
J Int Neuropsychol Soc. 2009 Sep;15(5):758-68. doi: 10.1017/S1355617709990361. Epub 2009 Jul 2.
2
Different approaches to differential item functioning in health applications. Advantages, disadvantages and some neglected topics.健康应用中项目功能差异的不同方法。优点、缺点及一些被忽视的主题。
Med Care. 2006 Nov;44(11 Suppl 3):S152-70. doi: 10.1097/01.mlr.0000245142.74628.ab.
3
Boston naming test short forms: a comparison of previous forms with new item response theory based forms.波士顿命名测试简表:基于项目反应理论的新简表与以往简表的比较
J Clin Exp Neuropsychol. 2004 Oct;26(7):891-902. doi: 10.1080/13803390490510716.
4
Assessment practices of clinical neuropsychologists in the United States and Canada: a survey of INS, NAN, and APA Division 40 members.美国和加拿大临床神经心理学家的评估实践:对美国国家神经心理学会(INS)、美国神经心理学学会(NAN)和美国心理学会第40分会成员的调查。
Arch Clin Neuropsychol. 2005 Jan;20(1):33-65. doi: 10.1016/j.acn.2004.02.005.
5
The 60-item Boston Naming Test: norms for cognitively intact adults aged 25 to 88 years.60项波士顿命名测试:25至88岁认知功能正常成年人的常模。
J Clin Exp Neuropsychol. 1997 Dec;19(6):922-32. doi: 10.1080/01688639708403773.