Division of Movement Disorders, Department of Neurology, Yale School of Medicine, Yale University, New Haven, CT, USA; Department of Chronic Disease Epidemiology, Yale School of Public Health, Yale University, New Haven, CT, USA; Center for Neuroepidemiology and Clinical Neurological Research, Yale School of Medicine, Yale University, New Haven, CT, USA.
Division of Movement Disorders, Department of Neurology, Yale School of Medicine, Yale University, New Haven, CT, USA.
J Neurol Sci. 2018 Oct 15;393:45-50. doi: 10.1016/j.jns.2018.08.006. Epub 2018 Aug 6.
The search for genes for essential tremor (ET) is active. Researchers often depend on probands' reports or self-reports to assign disease status to relatives. Yet there are surprisingly few data on the validity of these reports. In two prior studies, with small sample sizes, validity was poor (sensitivity = 16.7-43.3%). In the current study, ET probands and their relatives were screened for tremor and then underwent a videotaped in-person neurological examination. One investigator then assessed the screening questionnaires and videotapes to assign diagnoses of ET, borderline tremor or other diagnosis. There were 98 probands and 243 relatives (105 with ET, 34 with borderline tremor). Educational attainment was high (15.6 ± 2.7 years). Probands failed to report tremor in 39/139 relatives with ET or borderline tremor; conversely, they reported tremor in 32/104 relatives without ET or borderline tremor. Thus, in total, there were 71/243 (29.2%) mis-identifications. Thirty six of 139 ET and borderline ET cases failed to self-report tremor; conversely, 30/104 relatives without ET or borderline tremor self-reported tremor. Thus, in total, there were 66/243 (27.2%) mis-identifications. In summary, in individuals with greater educational attainment, the validity of reported information on ET was considerably higher than previously reported. Despite this, even among well-educated individuals in North America, probands' reports and self-reports misclassified approximately 30% (i.e., one-in-three) of relatives.
特发性震颤(ET)相关基因的研究正在如火如荼地进行。研究人员通常依赖于先证者的报告或自我报告来将疾病状态分配给亲属。然而,关于这些报告的有效性的数据却少得惊人。在之前的两项研究中,由于样本量较小,其有效性较差(敏感性=16.7-43.3%)。在当前的研究中,ET 先证者及其亲属接受了震颤筛查,然后进行了录像面对面的神经学检查。然后,一名研究人员评估了筛查问卷和录像带,以分配 ET、边界震颤或其他诊断。共有 98 名先证者和 243 名亲属(105 名患有 ET,34 名患有边界震颤)。受教育程度较高(15.6±2.7 年)。先证者未能报告 139 名 ET 或边界震颤亲属中的 39 名震颤;相反,他们报告了 104 名无 ET 或边界震颤亲属中的 32 名震颤。因此,总共出现了 71/243(29.2%)的错误识别。在 139 名 ET 和边界震颤病例中,有 36 名未能自我报告震颤;相反,有 30/104 名无 ET 或边界震颤的亲属自我报告了震颤。因此,总共出现了 66/243(27.2%)的错误识别。总之,在受教育程度较高的个体中,先证者报告的 ET 信息的有效性明显高于之前的报告。尽管如此,即使在北美受过良好教育的个体中,先证者的报告和自我报告也将大约 30%(即三分之一)的亲属错误分类。