• 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

阿尔茨海默病评估量表(ADAS-Cog)在纵向研究中的可靠性。

Reliability of the Alzheimer's disease assessment scale (ADAS-Cog) in longitudinal studies.

机构信息

Nathan S. Kline Institute for Psychiatric Research, 1 Wards Island Complex, Wards Island New York, NY 10035, USA.

出版信息

Curr Alzheimer Res. 2013 Nov;10(9):952-63. doi: 10.2174/15672050113106660160.

DOI:10.2174/15672050113106660160
PMID:24117118
Abstract

BACKGROUND

Considering the scarcity of longitudinal assessments of reliability, there is need for a more precise understanding of cognitive decline in Alzheimer's Disease (AD). The primary goal was to assess longitudinal changes in inter-rater reliability, test retest reliability and internal consistency of scores of the ADAS-Cog.

METHODS

2,618 AD subjects were enrolled in seven randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicenter-trials from 1986 to 2009. Reliability, internal-consistency and cross-sectional analysis of ADAS-Cog and MMSE across seven visits were examined.

RESULTS

Intra-class correlation (ICC) for ADAS-Cog was moderate to high supporting their reliability. Absolute Agreement ICCs 0.392 (Visit-7) to 0.806 (Visit-2) showed a progressive decrease in correlations across time. Item analysis revealed a decrease in item correlations, with the lowest correlations for Visit 7 for Commands (ICC=0.148), Comprehension (ICC=0.092), Spoken Language (ICC=0.044).

DISCUSSION

Suitable assessment of AD treatments is maintained through accurate measurement of clinically significant outcomes. Targeted rater education ADAS-Cog items over-time can improve ability to administer and score the scale.

摘要

背景

考虑到可靠性的纵向评估稀缺,需要更精确地了解阿尔茨海默病(AD)的认知下降。主要目标是评估 ADAS-Cog 的评分的组内可靠性、重测信度和内部一致性的纵向变化。

方法

1986 年至 2009 年,2618 名 AD 患者参加了七项随机、双盲、安慰剂对照、多中心试验。检查了 ADAS-Cog 和 MMSE 在七次就诊中的可靠性、内部一致性和横断面分析。

结果

ADAS-Cog 的组内相关系数(ICC)为中等到高度,支持其可靠性。绝对一致性 ICC 为 0.392(就诊 7)至 0.806(就诊 2),表明随着时间的推移相关性逐渐降低。项目分析显示项目相关性下降,对于就诊 7 的命令(ICC=0.148)、理解(ICC=0.092)、口语(ICC=0.044)的相关性最低。

讨论

通过准确测量临床显著结局,维持了对 AD 治疗的适当评估。针对 ADAS-Cog 项目的评分,随着时间的推移,评分者的教育可以提高管理和评分的能力。

相似文献

1
Reliability of the Alzheimer's disease assessment scale (ADAS-Cog) in longitudinal studies.阿尔茨海默病评估量表(ADAS-Cog)在纵向研究中的可靠性。
Curr Alzheimer Res. 2013 Nov;10(9):952-63. doi: 10.2174/15672050113106660160.
2
The validity and reliability of the Turkish version of Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale-Cognitive Subscale (ADAS-Cog) in patients with mild and moderate Alzheimer's disease and normal subjects.阿尔茨海默病评估量表认知分量表(ADAS-Cog)土耳其语版本在轻度和中度阿尔茨海默病患者及正常受试者中的有效性和可靠性。
Int J Geriatr Psychiatry. 2006 Mar;21(3):259-65. doi: 10.1002/gps.1457.
3
An Arabic Version of the Cognitive Subscale of the Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale (ADAS-Cog): Reliability, Validity, and Normative Data.阿尔茨海默病评估量表认知分量表(ADAS-Cog)的阿拉伯文版本:信度、效度和常模数据。
J Alzheimers Dis. 2017;60(1):11-21. doi: 10.3233/JAD-170222.
4
The reliability and validity of the Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale Cognitive Subscale (ADAS-Cog) among the elderly Chinese in Hong Kong.阿尔茨海默病评估量表认知分量表(ADAS-Cog)在香港老年中国人中的信度和效度。
Ann Acad Med Singap. 2000 Jul;29(4):474-85.
5
Item analysis of ADAS-Cog: effect of baseline cognitive impairment in a clinical AD trial.ADAS-Cog 项目分析:在一项临床 AD 试验中认知障碍基线的影响。
Am J Alzheimers Dis Other Demen. 2010 Mar;25(2):119-24. doi: 10.1177/1533317509350298.
6
Psychometric evaluation of ADAS-Cog and NTB for measuring drug response.ADAS-Cog 和 NTB 量表用于测量药物反应的心理计量学评估。
Acta Neurol Scand. 2014 Feb;129(2):114-22. doi: 10.1111/ane.12153. Epub 2013 Jun 13.
7
Effects of memantine on cognition in patients with moderate to severe Alzheimer's disease: post-hoc analyses of ADAS-cog and SIB total and single-item scores from six randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies.美金刚对中重度阿尔茨海默病患者认知功能的影响:来自 6 项随机、双盲、安慰剂对照研究的 ADAS-cog 和 SIB 总分及单项评分的事后分析。
Int J Geriatr Psychiatry. 2009 May;24(5):532-8. doi: 10.1002/gps.2226.
8
Detecting treatment effects with combinations of the ADAS-cog items in patients with mild and moderate Alzheimer's disease.检测轻度和中度阿尔茨海默病患者中 ADAS-cog 项目组合的治疗效果。
Int J Geriatr Psychiatry. 2012 Jan;27(1):15-21. doi: 10.1002/gps.2679. Epub 2011 Mar 8.
9
Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale-Cognitive subscale variants in mild cognitive impairment and mild Alzheimer's disease: change over time and the effect of enrichment strategies.轻度认知障碍和轻度阿尔茨海默病中阿尔茨海默病评估量表-认知子量表变体:随时间的变化及强化策略的影响
Alzheimers Res Ther. 2016 Feb 12;8:8. doi: 10.1186/s13195-016-0170-5.
10
[Diagnostic value and functional correlations of the ADAS-Cog scale in Alzheimer's disease: data on NORMACODEM project].[阿尔茨海默病中ADAS-Cog量表的诊断价值及功能相关性:NORMACODEM项目数据]
Neurologia. 2007 Oct;22(8):493-501.

引用本文的文献

1
High inter-rater reliability in consensus diagnoses and overall assessment in the Asian Cohort for Alzheimer's Disease Study.亚洲阿尔茨海默病研究队列中,共识诊断和总体评估具有较高的评分者间信度。
NPJ Dement. 2025;1(1):18. doi: 10.1038/s44400-025-00015-1. Epub 2025 Jul 30.
2
Detecting Treatment Group Differences in Alzheimer's Disease Clinical Trials: A Comparison of Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale - Cognitive Subscale (ADAS-Cog) and the Clinical Dementia Rating - Sum of Boxes (CDR-SB).阿尔茨海默病临床试验中治疗组差异的检测:阿尔茨海默病评估量表-认知分量表(ADAS-Cog)与临床痴呆评定量表-总盒分(CDR-SB)的比较。
J Prev Alzheimers Dis. 2018;5(1):15-20. doi: 10.14283/jpad.2018.2.
3
A Systematic Review of Longitudinal Studies Which Measure Alzheimer's Disease Biomarkers.
一项对纵向研究阿尔茨海默病生物标志物的系统评价。
J Alzheimers Dis. 2017;59(4):1359-1379. doi: 10.3233/JAD-170261.
4
Correlated patterns of neuropsychological and behavioral symptoms in frontal variant of Alzheimer disease and behavioral variant frontotemporal dementia: a comparative case study.阿尔茨海默病额叶变异型与行为变异型额颞叶痴呆的神经心理学和行为症状相关模式:一项对比病例研究。
Neurol Sci. 2016 May;37(5):797-803. doi: 10.1007/s10072-015-2405-9. Epub 2015 Nov 14.
5
A Risk-Benefit Assessment of Dementia Medications: Systematic Review of the Evidence.痴呆症药物的风险效益评估:证据的系统综述
Drugs Aging. 2015 Jun;32(6):453-67. doi: 10.1007/s40266-015-0266-9.