Suppr超能文献

简易蒙特利尔认知评估量表的准确性:系统评价与验证。

Accuracy of the short-form Montreal Cognitive Assessment: Systematic review and validation.

机构信息

Department Medicine for the Elderly, Queen Elizabeth University Hospital, Glasgow, UK.

Institute of Cardiovascular and Medical Sciences, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK.

出版信息

Int J Geriatr Psychiatry. 2019 Oct;34(10):1515-1525. doi: 10.1002/gps.5162. Epub 2019 Jul 2.

Abstract

INTRODUCTION

Short-form versions of the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (SF-MoCA) are increasingly used to screen for dementia in research and practice. We sought to collate evidence on the accuracy of SF-MoCAs and to externally validate these assessment tools.

METHODS

We performed systematic literature searching across multidisciplinary electronic literature databases, collating information on the content and accuracy of all published SF-MoCAs. We then validated all the SF-MoCAs against clinical diagnosis using independent stroke (n = 787) and memory clinic (n = 410) data sets.

RESULTS

We identified 13 different SF-MoCAs (21 studies, n = 6477 participants) with differing test content and properties. There was a pattern of high sensitivity across the range of SF-MoCA tests. In the published literature, for detection of post stroke cognitive impairment, median sensitivity across included studies: 0.88 (range: 0.70-1.00); specificity: 0.70 (0.39-0.92). In our independent validation using stroke data, median sensitivity: 0.99 (0.80-1.00); specificity: 0.40 (0.14-0.87). To detect dementia in older adults, median sensitivity: 0.88 (0.62-0.98); median specificity: 0.87 (0.07-0.98) in the literature and median sensitivity: 0.96 (range: 0.72-1.00); median specificity: 0.36 (0.14-0.86) in our validation. Horton's SF-MoCA (delayed recall, serial subtraction, and orientation) had the most favorable properties in stroke (sensitivity: 0.90, specificity: 0.87, positive predictive value [PPV]: 0.55, and negative predictive value [NPV]: 0.93), whereas Cecato's "MoCA reduced" (clock draw, animal naming, delayed recall, and orientation) performed better in the memory clinic (sensitivity: 0.72, specificity: 0.86, PPV: 0.55, and NPV: 0.93).

CONCLUSIONS

There are many published SF-MoCAs. Clinicians and researchers using a SF-MoCA should be explicit about the content. For all SF-MoCA, sensitivity is high and similar to the full scale suggesting potential utility as an initial cognitive screening tool. However, choice of SF-MoCA should be informed by the clinical population to be studied.

摘要

简介

蒙特利尔认知评估(MoCA)的短式版本越来越多地用于研究和实践中的痴呆筛查。我们试图整理关于 MoCA 短式版本的准确性的证据,并对这些评估工具进行外部验证。

方法

我们在多学科电子文献数据库中进行了系统的文献检索,收集了所有已发表的 MoCA 短式版本的内容和准确性信息。然后,我们使用独立的中风(n=787)和记忆诊所(n=410)数据集,根据临床诊断对所有 MoCA 短式版本进行了验证。

结果

我们确定了 13 种不同的 MoCA 短式版本(21 项研究,n=6477 名参与者),具有不同的测试内容和特性。在一系列的 MoCA 短式版本测试中,存在着高敏感性的模式。在已发表的文献中,用于检测中风后认知障碍,纳入研究的中位数敏感性为:0.88(范围:0.70-1.00);特异性:0.70(0.39-0.92)。在我们使用中风数据的独立验证中,中位数敏感性:0.99(0.80-1.00);特异性:0.40(0.14-0.87)。用于检测老年人群中的痴呆,文献中的中位数敏感性:0.88(0.62-0.98);中位数特异性:0.87(0.07-0.98)和验证中的中位数敏感性:0.96(范围:0.72-1.00);中位数特异性:0.36(0.14-0.86)。Horton 的 MoCA 短式版本(延迟回忆、串行减法和定向)在中风方面具有最有利的特性(敏感性:0.90,特异性:0.87,阳性预测值[PPV]:0.55,阴性预测值[NPV]:0.93),而 Cecato 的“简化 MoCA”(画钟、动物命名、延迟回忆和定向)在记忆诊所中的表现更好(敏感性:0.72,特异性:0.86,PPV:0.55,NPV:0.93)。

结论

有许多已发表的 MoCA 短式版本。使用 MoCA 短式版本的临床医生和研究人员应该明确其内容。对于所有的 MoCA 短式版本,敏感性都很高,与全量表相似,这表明其作为初始认知筛查工具具有潜在的效用。然而,应该根据要研究的临床人群来选择 MoCA 短式版本。

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