Department of Psychology, CRP-CPO, UR 7273, Université de Picardie Jules Verne, Amiens, France.
Arch Clin Neuropsychol. 2020 Jul 24;35(5):576-596. doi: 10.1093/arclin/acaa009.
To identify the available measures to assess prospective memory (PM) abilities, to describe their content, and to quantitatively summarize the effects of various diseases on PM depending on the type of assessment.
Three databases (PsycInfo, PsycArticles and PubMed) were searched up to June 2019 to identify the existing PM measures. The identified PM measures were classified according to the type of assessment: test batteries, single-trial procedures, questionnaires, and experimental procedures. The characteristics and psychometric properties were presented. PM performances were compared between patients with various diseases and controls depending on the type of assessment.
Most of the 16 measures identified evaluated both event- and time-based tasks, were linked to functional outcomes, showed empirical evidences regarding validity and reliability, and provided parallel versions. To a slightly lesser extent, few measures provided normative data, translations/adaptation into another language, cutoff scores for diagnostic purposes, qualitative scoring, parallel version, and external aids during the test. Compared to healthy controls, patients had significantly poorer performances when PM was assessed with experimental procedures. Heterogeneous data precluded the interpretation of a summary effect for test batteries, single-trial procedures, and questionnaires. Planned subgroup analyses indicated consistent PM impairment for patients compared to controls for three test batteries. However, PM complaints did not differ between patients and controls.
These results suggest that the use of PM test batteries and experimental procedures are relevant for detecting performance variations in diverse clinical populations. Clinical implications and directions for future research are discussed.
确定评估前瞻性记忆（PM）能力的可用方法，描述其内容，并根据评估类型定量总结各种疾病对 PM 的影响。
截至 2019 年 6 月，我们在三个数据库（PsycInfo、PsycArticles 和 PubMed）中进行了检索，以确定现有的 PM 测量方法。根据评估类型对确定的 PM 测量方法进行分类：测试组合、单试程序、问卷和实验程序。介绍了它们的特征和心理测量特性。根据评估类型，比较了各种疾病患者与对照组之间的 PM 表现。
确定的 16 项措施中，大多数都评估了基于事件和基于时间的任务，与功能结果相关，具有有效性和可靠性的经验证据，并提供了平行版本。在稍微次要的程度上，很少有措施提供了规范数据、翻译成另一种语言、用于诊断目的的截断分数、定性评分、平行版本和测试期间的外部辅助工具。与健康对照组相比，当使用实验程序评估 PM 时，患者的表现明显较差。由于数据存在异质性，无法解释测试组合、单试程序和问卷的综合效果。计划的亚组分析表明，对于三个测试组合，与对照组相比，患者的 PM 损害一致。然而，患者和对照组之间的 PM 抱怨没有差异。
这些结果表明，使用 PM 测试组合和实验程序对于检测各种临床人群中的表现变化是相关的。讨论了临床意义和未来研究方向。
