...
首页> 外文期刊>Medicine. >Ecological, convergent, and discriminative validities of the cognitive abilities screening instrument in people with dementia
【24h】

Ecological, convergent, and discriminative validities of the cognitive abilities screening instrument in people with dementia

机译:痴呆症患者筛查仪器的生态,收敛和判别有效性

获取原文

摘要

BACKGROUND:The Cognitive Abilities Screening Instrument (CASI) assesses global cognitive function in people with dementia with 9 domains (i.e., long-term memory, short-term memory, concentration, orientation, attention, abstraction and judgment, language abilities, visual construction, and category fluency). However, the ecological, convergent, and discriminant validities of the CASI have not yet been examined.PURPOSE:This study designed to investigate these 3 validities of the CASI in people with dementia.METHODS:Fifty-eight participants underwent assessments with the CASI, 3 functional measures, and 3 cognitive measures. Pearson's r was used to estimate correlations among the CASI and 3 functional measures for examining ecological validity. We computed correlations (r) among the CASI and 3 functional measures for examining convergent validity. An independent t-test was applied to compare the levels of disability, and ceiling/floor effects were analyzed for examining discriminative validity.RESULTS:The CASI total score and domains had moderate to high correlations with 3 functional measures (r?=?0.42-0.80), except in 2 CASI domains (i.e., attention and language). The CASI total score and domains showed moderate to high correlations with 3 cognitive measures (r?=?0.45-0.93). The t-test results revealed significant differences (P??.05) in the CASI total score and other domains except for the short-term memory domains. Four domains of the CASI showed noticeable ceiling effects (22.4-39.7%).CONCLUSIONS:The CASI has adequate ecological validity, good convergent validity, and acceptable discriminative validity in people with dementia. The 5 domains with nonsignificant differences or ceiling effects should only be used with caution to distinguish people with dementia.Copyright ? 2021 the Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc.
机译:背景:筛选仪器(CASI)的认知能力评估痴呆症的全球认知功能,具有9个域名(即长期记忆,短期记忆,集中,方向,注意,抽象和判断,语言能力,视觉建设,和分类流利)。然而,尚未检查CASI的生态,收敛和判别效果。本研究旨在调查痴呆症中CASI的这3个效力。方法:五十八名参与者接受了CASI的评估,3功能措施,以及3个认知措施。 Pearson的R用于估计CASI之间的相关性和3个功能措施来检查生态有效性。我们计算CASI中的相关(R)和3个功能措施,用于检查会聚有效性。应用一个独立的T检验以比较残疾水平,并分析天花板/楼层效应以检查鉴别性有效性。结果:CASI总分和域具有中度至高相关性,与3个功能测量(R?= 0.42- 0.80),除了2个Casi域(即,注意和语言)。 CASI总得分和域显示与3个认知措施(R?= 0.45-0.93)中等至高的相关性。除了短期记忆域之外,T检验结果显示了CASI总分和其他域中的显着差异(P?&。05)。 CASI的四个域显示出明显的天花板效应(22.4-39.7%)。结论:CASI具有足够的生态有效性,良好的收敛有效性,患有痴呆症的人们的可接受的歧视性有效性。 5个具有无显着差异或天花板效应的域名应该谨慎使用,以区分痴呆症的人。 2021提交人。由Wolters Kluwer Health,Inc。出版

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号