Suppr超能文献

连线测验:纸笔版与电子版的比较。

Trail Making Test: Comparison of paper-and-pencil and electronic versions.

作者信息

Bracken Magdalene R, Mazur-Mosiewicz Anya, Glazek Kuba

机构信息

Department of Psychiatry, Allegheny General Hospital , Pittsburgh , Pennsylvania , USA.

Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Oklahoma State University , Tulsa , Oklahoma , USA.

出版信息

Appl Neuropsychol Adult. 2019 Nov-Dec;26(6):522-532. doi: 10.1080/23279095.2018.1460371. Epub 2018 Sep 28.

Abstract

The Trail Making Test (TMT) was adapted for the iPad by Parker-O'Brien, which uses the 2004 Tombaugh norms. This study investigated the equivalency of this electronic test by (a) examining the test-retest reliability of the iPad-TMT, and (b) calculating the concurrent validity between the two versions. The sample included 77 healthy adults. Reliability was assessed by Pearson product-moment correlation and intraclass correlation coefficient, while validity was assessed by MANOVA. Results indicate that Part A of the iPad-TMT did not demonstrate adequate test-retest reliability over 1 week ( = 0.15-0.70); Part B demonstrated adequate test-retest reliability in the majority of groups ( = 0.33-0.80). Conversely, Part A of the electronic TMT demonstrated adequate concurrent validity, whereas Part B did not; however, validity in Part A has minimal significance without adequate reliability. Handedness had a significant effect on performance, with left-handers performing slower on the electronic TMT Part A ( < .05) and the traditional TMT Part B ( < .05). Clinicians should use caution when using electronic versions of traditional tests, as they may assess different constructs. New norms should be developed. The role of handedness on TMT performance should be further assessed.

摘要

帕克 - 奥布赖恩(Parker - O'Brien)将连线测验(TMT)改编为适用于iPad的版本,该版本采用了2004年汤博(Tombaugh)常模。本研究通过以下方式调查了这种电子测试的等效性:(a)检查iPad - TMT的重测信度,以及(b)计算两个版本之间的同时效度。样本包括77名健康成年人。信度通过皮尔逊积差相关和组内相关系数进行评估,而效度通过多变量方差分析(MANOVA)进行评估。结果表明,iPad - TMT的A部分在1周内未表现出足够的重测信度(r = 0.15 - 0.70);B部分在大多数组中表现出足够的重测信度(r = 0.33 - 0.80)。相反,电子TMT的A部分表现出足够的同时效度,而B部分则没有;然而,如果没有足够的信度,A部分的效度意义不大。利手对测试表现有显著影响,左利手在电子TMT的A部分(p <.05)和传统TMT的B部分(p <.05)上表现较慢。临床医生在使用传统测试的电子版本时应谨慎,因为它们可能评估不同的结构。应制定新的常模。利手对TMT表现的作用应进一步评估。

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