Suppr超能文献

一项关于非药物性痴呆预防与早期检测等效性及有效性验证的研究:非随机等效设计。

A Study on Verification of Equivalence and Effectiveness of Non-Pharmacologic Dementia Prevention and Early Detection Contents : Non-Randomly Equivalent Design.

作者信息

Jeong Hyun-Seok, Kim Oh-Lyong, Koo Bon-Hoon, Kim Ki-Hyun, Kim Gi-Hwan, Bai Dai-Seg, Kim Ji-Yean, Chang Mun-Seon, Kim Hye-Geum

机构信息

Department of Psychology, College of Social Science, Kyungpook National University, Daegu, Korea.

Department of Neurosurgery, College of Medicine, Yeungnam University, Daegu, Korea.

出版信息

J Korean Neurosurg Soc. 2022 Mar;65(2):315-324. doi: 10.3340/jkns.2021.0153. Epub 2022 Feb 17.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to verify the equivalence and effectiveness of the tablet-administered Korean Repeatable Battery for the Assessment of Neuropsychological Status (K-RBANS) for the prevention and early detection of dementia.

METHODS

Data from 88 psychiatry and neurology patient samples were examined to evaluate the equivalence between tablet and paper administrations of the K-RBANS using a non-randomly equivalent group design. We calculated the prediction scores of the tablet-administered K-RBANS based on demographics and covariate-test scores for focal tests using norm samples and tested format effects. In addition, we compared the receiver operating characteristic curves to confirm the effectiveness of the K-RBANS for preventing and detecting dementia.

RESULTS

In the analysis of raw scores, line orientation showed a significant difference (t=-2.94, p<0.001), and subtests showed small to large effect sizes (0.04-0.86) between paper- and tablet-administered K-RBANS. To investigate the format effect, we compared the predicted scaled scores of the tablet sample to the scaled scores of the norm sample. Consequently, a small effect size (d≤0.20) was observed in most of the subtests, except word list and story recall, which showed a medium effect size (d=0.21), while picture naming and subtests of delayed memory showed significant differences in the one-sample t-test. In addition, the area under the curve of the total scale index (TSI) (0.827; 95% confidence interval, 0.738-0.916) was higher than that of the five indices, ranging from 0.688 to 0.820. The sensitivity and specificity of TSI were 80% and 76%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

The overall results of this study suggest that the tablet-administered K-RBANS showed significant equivalence to the norm sample, although some subtests showed format effects, and it may be used as a valid tool for the brief screening of patients with neuropsychological disorders in Korea.

摘要

目的

本研究旨在验证用于痴呆预防和早期检测的平板电脑版韩国可重复神经心理状态评估量表(K-RBANS)的等效性和有效性。

方法

使用非随机等效组设计,对88例精神病学和神经病学患者样本的数据进行检查,以评估平板电脑版和纸质版K-RBANS之间的等效性。我们根据人口统计学和焦点测试的协变量测试分数,使用常模样本计算平板电脑版K-RBANS的预测分数,并测试格式效应。此外,我们比较了受试者工作特征曲线,以确认K-RBANS在预防和检测痴呆方面的有效性。

结果

在原始分数分析中,线条方向显示出显著差异(t=-2.94,p<0.001),纸质版和平板电脑版K-RBANS之间的子测试显示出小到中等的效应量(0.04-0.86)。为了研究格式效应,我们将平板电脑样本的预测量表分数与常模样本的量表分数进行了比较。因此,除了单词列表和故事回忆显示中等效应量(d=0.21)外,大多数子测试中观察到小效应量(d≤0.20),而图片命名和延迟记忆子测试在单样本t检验中显示出显著差异。此外,总量表指数(TSI)的曲线下面积(0.827;95%置信区间,0.738-0.916)高于五个指数的曲线下面积,范围为0.688至0.820。TSI的敏感性和特异性分别为80%和76%。

结论

本研究的总体结果表明,尽管一些子测试显示出格式效应,但平板电脑版K-RBANS与常模样本显示出显著等效性,它可能被用作韩国神经心理障碍患者简短筛查的有效工具。

相似文献

2
The Korean Repeatable Battery for the Assessment of Neuropsychological Status-Update : Psychiatric and Neurosurgery Patient Sample Validity.
J Korean Neurosurg Soc. 2021 Jan;64(1):125-135. doi: 10.3340/jkns.2020.0090. Epub 2020 Oct 27.
5
The Clinical Utility of the TYM and RBANS in a One-Stop Memory Clinic in Singapore: A Pilot Study.
J Geriatr Psychiatry Neurol. 2019 Mar;32(2):68-73. doi: 10.1177/0891988718824034. Epub 2019 Jan 10.
9
The repeatable battery for the assessment of the neuropsychological status (RBANS): a diagnostic validity study in Greek elderly.
Aging Clin Exp Res. 2019 Sep;31(9):1305-1312. doi: 10.1007/s40520-018-1076-9. Epub 2018 Nov 23.

本文引用的文献

1
The Korean Repeatable Battery for the Assessment of Neuropsychological Status-Update : Psychiatric and Neurosurgery Patient Sample Validity.
J Korean Neurosurg Soc. 2021 Jan;64(1):125-135. doi: 10.3340/jkns.2020.0090. Epub 2020 Oct 27.
2
Measurement Equivalence of "Touch-Screen" versus "Paper-Based" Assessments of OHRQoL: A Randomized Crossover Trial.
Clin Cosmet Investig Dent. 2020 May 29;12:199-204. doi: 10.2147/CCIDE.S248429. eCollection 2020.
3
The Prevalence of Dementia: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
J Alzheimers Dis. 2020;73(3):1157-1166. doi: 10.3233/JAD-191092.
5
Raw-score equivalence of computer-assisted and paper versions of WISC-V.
Psychol Serv. 2019 May;16(2):213-220. doi: 10.1037/ser0000295. Epub 2018 Nov 8.
6
Establishing Measurement Equivalence Across Computer- and Paper-Based Tests of Spatial Cognition.
Hum Factors. 2018 May;60(3):340-350. doi: 10.1177/0018720817747731. Epub 2017 Dec 15.
7
Clinical data interchange standards consortium: A bridge to overcome data standardisation.
Perspect Clin Res. 2013 Apr;4(2):115-6. doi: 10.4103/2229-3485.111779.
9
Measuring cognitive change in a cohort of patients with Alzheimer's disease.
Stat Med. 2000;19(11-12):1421-32. doi: 10.1002/(sici)1097-0258(20000615/30)19:11/12<1421::aid-sim434>3.0.co;2-p.
10
The Clinical Dementia Rating (CDR): current version and scoring rules.
Neurology. 1993 Nov;43(11):2412-4. doi: 10.1212/wnl.43.11.2412-a.

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