Huang Qi, Bolt Daniel, Jonaitis Erin, Hermann Bruce, Studer Rachel, Du Lianlian, Ryther Brenda, Sparks Lia, Galvin James E, Johnson Sterling, Langhough Rebecca
Department of Educational Psychology, University of Wisconsin-Madison School of Education, Madison, Wisconsin, USA.
Wisconsin Alzheimer's Institute, University of Wisconsin-Madison School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, Wisconsin, USA.
Alzheimers Dement. 2025 Feb;21(2):e14470. doi: 10.1002/alz.14470. Epub 2024 Dec 23.
The Clinical Dementia Rating (CDR) Scale is a gold standard for staging impairment in Alzheimer's disease and other dementias (ADRD). The Quick Dementia Rating System (QDRS) offers similar results in 3 to 5 minutes without a trained clinician. This study aimed to (1) investigate concordance between comparably derived QDRS and CDR global scores, (2) examine item-level QDRS/CDR agreement, and (3) compare sample characteristics and cognitive performance across QDRS/CDR global concordant/discordant groups.
The study included 351 QDRS/CDR pairs from 297 participants in the Wisconsin Registry for Alzheimer's Prevention (WRAP). Analyses included descriptive indices of QDRS/CDR agreement, lasso logistic regression, tetrachoric correlations, and linear mixed models.
The QDRS global/CDR global concordance rate is 70.66%. Memory item discrepancies were primarily responsible for QDRS/CDR global rating discordance. Average cognitive scores were highest in concordant-normal QDRS/CDR and lowest in concordant-abnormal QDRS/CDR.
The QDRS effectively screened for impairment in this sample. Future analyses will investigate QDRS relations to ADRD biomarkers.
The Quick Dementia Rating System (QDRS) effectively screened for impairment in Alzheimer's disease and other dementias (ADRD) in a non-demented sample. Concordance rate between QDRS global and Clinical Dementia Rating (CDR) Scale global scores is 70.66%. Memory item discrepancies primarily cause QDRS/CDR global score discordance. Cognitive scores are associated with QDRS/CDR concordances/discordances. Future analyses will explore QDRS relations to ADRD biomarkers.
临床痴呆评定量表（CDR）是阿尔茨海默病及其他痴呆症（ADRD）损害分期的金标准。快速痴呆评定系统（QDRS）在无需专业临床医生的情况下，3至5分钟即可得出类似结果。本研究旨在：（1）调查通过类似方法得出的QDRS和CDR总体评分之间的一致性；（2）检查QDRS/CDR项目层面的一致性；（3）比较QDRS/CDR总体一致/不一致组的样本特征和认知表现。
本研究纳入了来自威斯康星州阿尔茨海默病预防登记处（WRAP）的297名参与者的351对QDRS/CDR数据。分析包括QDRS/CDR一致性的描述性指标、套索逻辑回归、四分相关和线性混合模型。
QDRS总体/CDR总体一致性率为70.66%。记忆项目差异是导致QDRS/CDR总体评分不一致的主要原因。在QDRS/CDR总体一致且正常组中平均认知得分最高，在QDRS/CDR总体一致且异常组中最低。
QDRS在该样本中有效筛查了损害情况。未来分析将研究QDRS与ADRD生物标志物之间的关系。
快速痴呆评定系统（QDRS）在非痴呆样本中有效筛查了阿尔茨海默病及其他痴呆症（ADRD）的损害情况。QDRS总体评分与临床痴呆评定量表（CDR）总体评分之间的一致性率为70.66%。记忆项目差异是导致QDRS/CDR总体评分不一致的主要原因。认知得分与QDRS/CDR的一致性/不一致性相关。未来分析将探索QDRS与ADRD生物标志物之间的关系。
