Quantifying the Use of Space in the Clock Drawing Test: Validity in Hemispatial Neglect.

IF 2.1 4区 心理学 Q2 PSYCHOLOGY
Lorenzo Diana, Maria Luisa Rusconi, Edoardo Nicolò Aiello, Nadia Bolognini, Alessia Monti, Massimo Corbo, Matteo Sozzi
{"title":"Quantifying the Use of Space in the Clock Drawing Test: Validity in Hemispatial Neglect.","authors":"Lorenzo Diana, Maria Luisa Rusconi, Edoardo Nicolò Aiello, Nadia Bolognini, Alessia Monti, Massimo Corbo, Matteo Sozzi","doi":"10.1093/arclin/acae059","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>The Clock Drawing Test (CDT) is a widely used test for cognitive screening as its execution taps into a large number of cognitive functions. Because of the involvement of visuospatial abilities, the CDT is also commonly used to assess hemispatial neglect. In the present study, we introduce a new quantitative scoring method for the CDT that aims to measure the use of space for each half of the clock face and asymmetries of space use.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>Two measures are introduced: the explored space (ES) and used space (US) for each half of the clock, as well as two derived asymmetry indices. Such new measures were applied to CDTs of four groups of participants: right brain-damaged patients without visuospatial neglect, two groups of right brain-damaged patients with varying degrees of visuospatial neglect, and a group of neurologically healthy participants.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Analyses showed that only neglect patients explored and used the left clock half significantly less than the right one. This result was also confirmed by the asymmetry indices, where neglect patients showed a stronger rightward bias. For neglect patients, the US asymmetry index correlated with the patients' scores on the neuropsychological tests. The analyses of receiver operating characteristic curves showed that left US and left ES scores had good accuracy in categorizing neglect patients.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The present work provides new quantitative indices of CDT space usage in hemispatial neglect. Cutoffs are provided for clinical practice.</p>","PeriodicalId":8176,"journal":{"name":"Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/arclin/acae059","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: The Clock Drawing Test (CDT) is a widely used test for cognitive screening as its execution taps into a large number of cognitive functions. Because of the involvement of visuospatial abilities, the CDT is also commonly used to assess hemispatial neglect. In the present study, we introduce a new quantitative scoring method for the CDT that aims to measure the use of space for each half of the clock face and asymmetries of space use.

Method: Two measures are introduced: the explored space (ES) and used space (US) for each half of the clock, as well as two derived asymmetry indices. Such new measures were applied to CDTs of four groups of participants: right brain-damaged patients without visuospatial neglect, two groups of right brain-damaged patients with varying degrees of visuospatial neglect, and a group of neurologically healthy participants.

Results: Analyses showed that only neglect patients explored and used the left clock half significantly less than the right one. This result was also confirmed by the asymmetry indices, where neglect patients showed a stronger rightward bias. For neglect patients, the US asymmetry index correlated with the patients' scores on the neuropsychological tests. The analyses of receiver operating characteristic curves showed that left US and left ES scores had good accuracy in categorizing neglect patients.

Conclusions: The present work provides new quantitative indices of CDT space usage in hemispatial neglect. Cutoffs are provided for clinical practice.

时钟绘图测试中空间使用的量化:半身空间感缺失的有效性。
测试目的时钟画图测验(CDT)是一种广泛使用的认知筛查测验,因为它的执行可以触及大量的认知功能。由于涉及视觉空间能力,CDT 也常用于评估半空间忽略。在本研究中,我们为 CDT 引入了一种新的量化评分方法,旨在测量钟面两半的空间使用情况以及空间使用的不对称性:方法:引入两种测量方法:每半个钟面的探索空间(ES)和使用空间(US),以及两个衍生的不对称指数。这些新的测量方法适用于四组参与者的 CDT:无视觉空间忽略的右脑受损患者、两组有不同程度视觉空间忽略的右脑受损患者和一组神经健康的参与者:分析表明,只有视觉空间疏忽患者对左半边时钟的探索和使用明显少于右半边时钟。不对称指数也证实了这一结果,忽视患者表现出更强的右倾倾向。对于忽视症患者,美国不对称指数与患者在神经心理测试中的得分相关。接受者操作特征曲线分析表明,左侧 US 和左侧 ES 评分在对忽视患者进行分类时具有良好的准确性:结论:本研究为半空间性忽视患者的 CDT 空间使用提供了新的定量指标。结论:本研究为偏侧空间忽略症患者的 CDT 空间使用提供了新的定量指标,并为临床实践提供了临界值。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.60
自引率
7.70%
发文量
358
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: The journal publishes original contributions dealing with psychological aspects of the etiology, diagnosis, and treatment of disorders arising out of dysfunction of the central nervous system. Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology will also consider manuscripts involving the established principles of the profession of neuropsychology: (a) delivery and evaluation of services, (b) ethical and legal issues, and (c) approaches to education and training. Preference will be given to empirical reports and key reviews. Brief research reports, case studies, and commentaries on published articles (not exceeding two printed pages) will also be considered. At the discretion of the editor, rebuttals to commentaries may be invited. Occasional papers of a theoretical nature will be considered.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信