Cross-cultural comparisons of the Mini-mental State Examination between Japanese and U.S. cohorts.

IF 4.6 2区 医学 Q1 GERIATRICS & GERONTOLOGY
International psychogeriatrics Pub Date : 2009-02-01 Epub Date: 2008-10-17 DOI:10.1017/S1041610208007886
Hiroko H Dodge, Kenichi Meguro, Hiroshi Ishii, Satoshi Yamaguchi, Judith A Saxton, Mary Ganguli
{"title":"Cross-cultural comparisons of the Mini-mental State Examination between Japanese and U.S. cohorts.","authors":"Hiroko H Dodge,&nbsp;Kenichi Meguro,&nbsp;Hiroshi Ishii,&nbsp;Satoshi Yamaguchi,&nbsp;Judith A Saxton,&nbsp;Mary Ganguli","doi":"10.1017/S1041610208007886","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The Mini-mental State Examination (MMSE) is widely used in Japan and the U.S.A. for cognitive screening in the clinical setting and in epidemiological studies. A previous Japanese community study reported distributions of the MMSE total score very similar to that of the U.S.A.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Data were obtained from the Monongahela Valley Independent Elder's Study (MoVIES), a representative sample of community-dwelling elderly people aged 65 and older living near Pittsburgh, U.S.A., and from the Tajiri Project, with similar aims in Tajiri, Japan. We examined item-by-item distributions of the MMSE between two cohorts, comparing (1) percentage of correct answers for each item within each cohort, and (2) relative difficulty of each item measured by Item Characteristic Curve analysis (ICC), which estimates log odds of obtaining a correct answer adjusted for the remaining MMSE items, demographic variables (age, gender, education) and interactions of demographic variables and cohort.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Median MMSE scores were very similar between the two samples within the same education groups. However, the relative difficulty of each item differed substantially between the two cohorts. Specifically, recall and auditory comprehension were easier for the Tajiri group, but reading comprehension and sentence construction were easier for the MoVIES group.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Our results reaffirm the importance of validation and examination of thresholds in each cohort to be studied when a common instrument is used as a dementia screening tool or for defining cognitive impairment.</p>","PeriodicalId":14368,"journal":{"name":"International psychogeriatrics","volume":"21 1","pages":"113-22"},"PeriodicalIF":4.6000,"publicationDate":"2009-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1017/S1041610208007886","citationCount":"25","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International psychogeriatrics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S1041610208007886","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2008/10/17 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"GERIATRICS & GERONTOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 25

Abstract

Background: The Mini-mental State Examination (MMSE) is widely used in Japan and the U.S.A. for cognitive screening in the clinical setting and in epidemiological studies. A previous Japanese community study reported distributions of the MMSE total score very similar to that of the U.S.A.

Methods: Data were obtained from the Monongahela Valley Independent Elder's Study (MoVIES), a representative sample of community-dwelling elderly people aged 65 and older living near Pittsburgh, U.S.A., and from the Tajiri Project, with similar aims in Tajiri, Japan. We examined item-by-item distributions of the MMSE between two cohorts, comparing (1) percentage of correct answers for each item within each cohort, and (2) relative difficulty of each item measured by Item Characteristic Curve analysis (ICC), which estimates log odds of obtaining a correct answer adjusted for the remaining MMSE items, demographic variables (age, gender, education) and interactions of demographic variables and cohort.

Results: Median MMSE scores were very similar between the two samples within the same education groups. However, the relative difficulty of each item differed substantially between the two cohorts. Specifically, recall and auditory comprehension were easier for the Tajiri group, but reading comprehension and sentence construction were easier for the MoVIES group.

Conclusions: Our results reaffirm the importance of validation and examination of thresholds in each cohort to be studied when a common instrument is used as a dementia screening tool or for defining cognitive impairment.

日本和美国人群心理状态测验的跨文化比较。
背景:迷你精神状态检查(MMSE)在日本和美国被广泛用于临床和流行病学研究中的认知筛查。先前的一项日本社区研究报告了MMSE总分的分布与美国非常相似。方法:数据来自Monongahela Valley独立老年人研究(MoVIES),这是一个居住在美国匹兹堡附近的65岁及以上社区老年人的代表性样本,以及来自日本Tajiri项目,具有类似的目标。我们检查了两个队列之间MMSE的逐项分布,比较了(1)每个队列中每个项目的正确答案百分比,以及(2)通过项目特征曲线分析(ICC)测量的每个项目的相对难度,该分析估计了根据剩余MMSE项目、人口变量(年龄、性别、教育)以及人口变量和队列的相互作用调整后获得正确答案的对数赔率。结果:在同一教育组的两个样本中,MMSE得分中位数非常相似。然而,每个项目的相对难度在两个队列之间存在很大差异。具体来说,Tajiri组的回忆和听觉理解更容易,而电影组的阅读理解和句子结构更容易。结论:我们的研究结果重申了验证和检查每个队列阈值的重要性,当一个共同的工具被用作痴呆筛查工具或定义认知障碍时。
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
International psychogeriatrics
International psychogeriatrics 医学-精神病学
CiteScore
9.10
自引率
8.60%
发文量
217
审稿时长
3-6 weeks
期刊介绍: A highly respected, multidisciplinary journal, International Psychogeriatrics publishes high quality original research papers in the field of psychogeriatrics. The journal aims to be the leading peer reviewed journal dealing with all aspects of the mental health of older people throughout the world. Circulated to over 1,000 members of the International Psychogeriatric Association, International Psychogeriatrics also features important editorials, provocative debates, literature reviews, book reviews and letters to the editor.
×
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