Department of Neuroscience, The Alfred Hospital, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Mov Disord. 2012 Sep 1;27(10):1243-54. doi: 10.1002/mds.25113. Epub 2012 Aug 13.
A number of cognitive abnormalities have been identified as putative diagnostic markers in neurodegenerative parkinsonism based on statistically significant differences between diseases. The effect sizes of these differences frequently have not been reported, making practical interpretation of the results difficult. The objective of this study was to assess the potential contribution of cognitive testing to the diagnosis of parkinsonian disorders by quantifying effect size of previously identified significant differentiating cognitive features. A Medline search identified 1038 articles. Nineteen studies directly comparing at least 2 of Parkinson's disease, progressive supranuclear palsy, multiple system atrophy, and corticobasal syndrome/degeneration were selected. Cohen's d and positive likelihood ratio were calculated as appropriate for cognitive tests showing statistically significant differences between diseases. Clinically useful differences were considered present when Cohen's d > 1 or the positive likelihood ratio > 2 and were considered high when Cohen's d > 1.94 or the positive likelihood ratio > 10. Only 16 of 141 cognitive tests were found to be highly useful. Cognitive testing was only moderately helpful in separating Parkinson's disease and multiple system atrophy. Inferior performance on phonemic (d = 1.56-2.13) and semantic (d = 1.43-2.13) verbal fluency, the Trail-Making Test (d = 1.63-1.95) and the Wisconsin Card Sorting Test (d = 1.63-2.22) were moderately to very useful in separating progressive supranuclear palsy from Parkinson's disease and multiple system atrophy. Cognitive testing could not differentiate corticobasal syndrome from other parkinsonian disorders, although sequential orobuccal apraxia was very useful (d = 2.01-2.23). Few of the cognitive tests separating parkinsonian disorders identified from previous studies have sufficient effect size to be practically useful. Even these features must be interpreted in conjunction with other clinical characteristics to be helpful diagnostically. © 2012 Movement Disorder Society.
已经确定了一些认知异常作为神经退行性帕金森病的推定诊断标志物,这是基于疾病之间存在统计学显著差异。这些差异的效应大小通常没有报告,使得结果的实际解释变得困难。本研究的目的是通过量化先前确定的具有显著区分能力的认知特征的效应大小,来评估认知测试对帕金森病障碍诊断的潜在贡献。通过 Medline 搜索确定了 1038 篇文章。选择了 19 项直接比较帕金森病、进行性核上性麻痹、多系统萎缩和皮质基底节变性/退化的研究。对于显示疾病之间存在统计学显著差异的认知测试,计算了 Cohen's d 和阳性似然比。当 Cohen's d > 1 或阳性似然比 > 2 时,认为存在临床有用的差异,当 Cohen's d > 1.94 或阳性似然比 > 10 时,认为存在高差异。在 141 项认知测试中,只有 16 项被认为非常有用。认知测试仅在区分帕金森病和多系统萎缩方面具有中等帮助。在语音流畅性(d = 1.56-2.13)、语义流畅性(d = 1.43-2.13)、连线测试(d = 1.63-1.95)和威斯康星卡片分类测试(d = 1.63-2.22)方面表现较差,可用于区分进行性核上性麻痹与帕金森病和多系统萎缩。认知测试无法区分皮质基底节变性与其他帕金森病障碍,尽管连续或颊部口运动不能非常有用(d = 2.01-2.23)。从以前的研究中分离出的用于区分帕金森病障碍的认知测试中,很少有足够的效应大小来实际使用。即使这些特征也必须与其他临床特征结合起来进行解释,才能在诊断上有所帮助。© 2012 运动障碍学会。