Eefsting J A, Boersma F, van Tilburg W, van den Brink W
Verpleeg- en reactiveringscentrum Het Zonnehuis, Zwolle.
Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd. 1997 Oct 25;141(43):2066-70.
To establish the criterion validity of the MMSE for dementia in a community-based population.
Descriptive.
Eight rural general practices and eight adherent institutions for long-term care near Zwolle, the Netherlands.
In the first (screening) stage, the MMSE was applied, in the second (diagnostic) stage the 'Cambridge examination for mental disorders of the elderly' (CAMDEX) was used. After exclusion of subjects with clinically relevant impairment of hearing and (or) vision, analyses were based on 2151 screened subjects. Based on a non-proportional, stratified randomized sampling procedure using the MMSE score as the stratification variable, 390 of the screened subjects were examined with the CAMDEX. Seventy-seven cases of DSM-III-R dementia were identified. Based on 390 paired observations the relationship between MMSE score and DSM-III-R dementia was modelled by logistic regression. After extrapolation of this relationship to the total screened population, sensitivity and specificity figures were calculated at several cut-offs of the MMSE, and Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) curves were constructed for the total population as well as for four subpopulations. (men, women, < 80, > or = 80 years).
At the cut-off of 23/24, sensitivity was 0.76 and specificity 0.91 in the total population. However, the criterion validity of the MMSE varied substantially between the four sex-age combinations. Criterion validity was especially poor for women in the younger age range.
The MMSE has only limited value in clinical practice. Use of uniform cut-offs has to be rejected.
在社区人群中确立简易精神状态检查表(MMSE)对痴呆的标准效度。
描述性研究。
荷兰斯沃伦附近的8家乡村全科诊所和8家长期护理机构。
在第一(筛查)阶段应用MMSE,在第二(诊断)阶段使用“剑桥老年精神障碍检查”(CAMDEX)。在排除听力和(或)视力有临床相关损害的受试者后,分析基于2151名接受筛查的受试者。基于以MMSE分数作为分层变量的非比例分层随机抽样程序,390名接受筛查的受试者接受了CAMDEX检查。确定了77例符合《精神疾病诊断与统计手册》第三版修订本(DSM-III-R)的痴呆病例。基于390对配对观察结果,通过逻辑回归对MMSE分数与DSM-III-R痴呆之间的关系进行建模。将这种关系外推至整个筛查人群后,在MMSE的几个临界值处计算敏感性和特异性数值,并为整个人群以及四个亚组人群(男性、女性、<80岁、≥80岁)构建受试者工作特征(ROC)曲线。
在临界值为23/24时,整个人群的敏感性为0.76,特异性为0.91。然而,MMSE的标准效度在四种性别-年龄组合之间差异很大。对于较年轻年龄组的女性,标准效度尤其差。
MMSE在临床实践中的价值有限。必须摒弃使用统一临界值的做法。