Monroe Todd, Carter Michael
John A. Hartford Foundation & Atlantic Philanthropies Claire M. Fagin Fellow, Vanderbilt University School of Nursing, 461 21st Avenue South, Nashville, TN 37240 USA.
The University of Tennessee Health Science Center, Memphis, TN USA.
Eur J Ageing. 2012 Jun 15;9(3):265-274. doi: 10.1007/s10433-012-0234-8. eCollection 2012 Sep.
Cognitive scales are used frequently in geriatric research and practice. These instruments are constructed with underlying assumptions that are a part of their validation process. A common measurement scale used in older adults is the Folstein Mini Mental State Exam (MMSE). The MMSE was designed to screen for cognitive impairment and is used often in geriatric research. This paper has three aims. Aim one was to explore four potential threats to validity in the use of the MMSE: (1) administering the exam without meeting the underlying assumptions, (2) not reporting that the underlying assumptions were assessed prior to test administration, (3) use of variable and inconsistent cut-off scores for the determination of presence of cognitive impairment, and (4) failure to adjust the scores based on the demographic characteristics of the tested subject. Aim two was to conduct a literature search to determine if the assumptions of (1) education level assessment, (2) sensory assessment, and (3) language fluency were being met and clearly reported in published research using the MMSE. Aim three was to provide recommendations to minimalize threats to validity in research studies that use cognitive scales, such as the MMSE. We found inconsistencies in published work in reporting whether or not subjects meet the assumptions that underlie a reliable and valid MMSE score. These inconsistencies can pose threats to the reliability of exam results. Fourteen of the 50 studies reviewed reported inclusion of all three of these assumptions. Inconsistencies in reporting the inclusion of the underlying assumptions for a reliable score could mean that subjects were not appropriate to be tested by use of the MMSE that an appropriate test administration of the MMSE was not clearly reported. Thus, the research literature could have threats to both validity and reliability based on misuse of or improper reported use of the MMSE. Six recommendations are provided to minimalize these threats in future research.
认知量表在老年医学研究和实践中经常被使用。这些工具的构建基于一些作为其验证过程一部分的潜在假设。老年人常用的一种测量量表是福尔斯坦简易精神状态检查表(MMSE)。MMSE旨在筛查认知障碍,常用于老年医学研究。本文有三个目标。目标一是探讨在使用MMSE时对效度的四个潜在威胁:(1)在未满足潜在假设的情况下进行测试;(2)未报告在测试前已评估潜在假设;(3)使用可变且不一致的临界分数来确定认知障碍的存在;(4)未根据被测试对象的人口统计学特征调整分数。目标二是进行文献检索,以确定在使用MMSE的已发表研究中,(1)教育水平评估、(2)感官评估和(3)语言流利度的假设是否得到满足并被清晰报告。目标三是提供建议,以尽量减少在使用认知量表(如MMSE)的研究中对效度的威胁。我们发现,在已发表的研究中,关于受试者是否满足可靠且有效的MMSE分数所依据的假设的报告存在不一致。这些不一致可能对考试结果的可靠性构成威胁。在 reviewed 的50项研究中,有14项报告包含了所有这三个假设。在报告可靠分数的潜在假设是否包含方面的不一致可能意味着受试者不适合使用MMSE进行测试,或者未清晰报告MMSE的适当测试管理。因此,由于对MMSE的误用或报告使用不当,研究文献可能对效度和可靠性都构成威胁。本文提供了六项建议,以在未来研究中尽量减少这些威胁。