Suppr超能文献

连线测验中的错误分析。

Analysis of errors on the Trail Making Test.

作者信息

Klusman L E, Cripe L I, Dodrill C B

机构信息

Madigan Army Medical Center, Tacoma, Washington.

出版信息

Percept Mot Skills. 1989 Jun;68(3 Pt 2):1199-204. doi: 10.2466/pms.1989.68.3c.1199.

Abstract

This study was designed to determine whether the number and/or types of errors on the Trail Making Test differentiated head-injured and normal control subjects. Errors on Part B were categorized into two types of shifting errors (from number to letter and from letter to number) and two types of sequencing errors (number and letter). Subjects consisted of 133 head-injured patients and 145 normal controls. Analysis showed that the frequency of errors on Parts A and B did not differ significantly between the groups nor did the percentage of subjects making errors. Total shifting and sequencing errors also did not differentiate between the two groups. Although head-injured subjects were more likely than controls to err in shifting from letters to numbers, this finding was of no apparent clinical usefulness. The discriminative value of time scores was confirmed.

摘要

本研究旨在确定连线测验中的错误数量和/或类型是否能区分脑损伤患者和正常对照组。B部分的错误分为两种转换错误(从数字到字母以及从字母到数字)和两种排序错误(数字和字母)。研究对象包括133名脑损伤患者和145名正常对照者。分析表明,两组在A部分和B部分的错误频率以及犯错受试者的百分比上均无显著差异。总的转换和排序错误也无法区分两组。尽管脑损伤患者比对照组更有可能在从字母转换到数字时出错,但这一发现并无明显临床实用价值。时间分数的判别价值得到了证实。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验