Suppr超能文献

慢性卒中幸存者淡漠评估量表的信度、效度及诊断准确性

Reliability, validity, and diagnostic accuracy of the apathy evaluation scale in chronic stroke survivors.

作者信息

Jamali Akram, Baluchnejadmojarad Tourandokht, Jazaeri Seyede Zohreh, Abedi Shiva, Mehdizadeh Hajar, Sharabiani Parvaneh Taghavi Azar, Taghizadeh Ghorban

机构信息

Department of Neurosciences, Faculty of Advanced Technologies in Medicine, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.

Cellular and Molecular Research Center, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.

出版信息

BMC Psychiatry. 2025 Mar 5;25(1):201. doi: 10.1186/s12888-025-06626-5.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

We aimed to determine the psychometric properties of the Apathy Evaluation Scale (AES) in chronic stroke survivors.

METHODS

In this study, 112 non-cognitive impairment stroke survivors participated. Acceptability, inter-rater, and test-retest reliability of the three Persian versions of AES (clinician, informant, and self-rated) were evaluated. The correlation of three AES versions with the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS), Modified Rankin Scale (mRS), and Barthel Index (BI) was evaluated. To assess the diagnostic accuracy of the three AES versions, stroke survivors were classified as apathetic (n = 43) and non-apathetic (n = 69) groups using the 'diagnostic criteria of apathy'.

RESULTS

The floor and ceiling effect, skewness, and kurtosis were within acceptable range for three AES versions. Internal consistency (α = 0.88-0.91) and test-retest and inter-rater reliability (ICC >0.90) were acceptable for all AES versions. Standard Error of Measurement and Minimal Detectable Change values for test-retest and/or inter-rater reliability ranged 1.6-2.5 and 4.42-6.93 for three versions of AES, respectively. Significant moderate to high correlation (r or ƿ = -0.34-0.69) was found between three AES versions and HADS-D, HADS-A, BI, and mRS. The cut-off point > 34 (sensitivity = 87.5%, specificity = 72.22%, and AUC = 0.80) was derived for discriminating apathetic from non-apathetic stroke survivors based on the AES- self-rated total score.

CONCLUSION

All three AES versions are reliable and valid screening tools to evaluate and characterize apathy in stroke survivors. The AES-self-rated had good discriminative validity for discriminating apathetic from non-apathetic subjects in non-cognitive impairment stroke survivors.

摘要

背景

我们旨在确定慢性卒中幸存者中冷漠评估量表(AES)的心理测量特性。

方法

在本研究中,112名无认知障碍的卒中幸存者参与其中。对AES的三个波斯语版本(临床医生评定版、知情者评定版和自评版)的可接受性、评定者间信度和重测信度进行了评估。评估了三个AES版本与医院焦虑抑郁量表(HADS)、改良Rankin量表(mRS)和Barthel指数(BI)的相关性。为评估三个AES版本的诊断准确性,根据“冷漠诊断标准”将卒中幸存者分为冷漠组(n = 43)和非冷漠组(n = 69)。

结果

三个AES版本的地板效应、天花板效应、偏度和峰度均在可接受范围内。所有AES版本的内部一致性(α = 0.88 - 0.91)以及重测信度和评定者间信度(组内相关系数>0.90)均可接受。三个AES版本重测信度和/或评定者间信度的测量标准误和最小可检测变化值分别为1.6 - 2.5和4.42 - 6.93。在三个AES版本与HADS - D、HADS - A、BI和mRS之间发现了显著的中度至高度相关性(r或ƿ = -0.34 - 0.69)。根据AES自评总分,得出区分冷漠与非冷漠卒中幸存者的截断点>34(敏感性 = 87.5%,特异性 = 72.22%,曲线下面积 = 0.80)。

结论

所有三个AES版本都是评估和描述卒中幸存者冷漠的可靠且有效的筛查工具。AES自评版在区分无认知障碍卒中幸存者中的冷漠与非冷漠受试者方面具有良好的区分效度。

相似文献

5
Reliability and validity of the Apathy Evaluation Scale.冷漠评估量表的信度和效度
Psychiatry Res. 1991 Aug;38(2):143-62. doi: 10.1016/0165-1781(91)90040-v.
9
Post-stroke apathy: an exploratory longitudinal study.卒中后淡漠:一项探索性纵向研究。
Cerebrovasc Dis. 2013;35(6):507-13. doi: 10.1159/000350202. Epub 2013 Jun 5.

本文引用的文献

5
Apathy after stroke: Diagnosis, mechanisms, consequences, and treatment.卒中后淡漠:诊断、机制、后果与治疗。
Int J Stroke. 2021 Jul;16(5):510-518. doi: 10.1177/1747493021990906. Epub 2021 Feb 4.

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