差异是否真实,差异是否相关:蒙特利尔认知评估中可检测到的最小临床重要变化

IF 1.9 Q3 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
Elias Lindvall , Tamar Abzhandadze , Terence J. Quinn , Katharina S. Sunnerhagen , Erik Lundström
{"title":"差异是否真实,差异是否相关:蒙特利尔认知评估中可检测到的最小临床重要变化","authors":"Elias Lindvall ,&nbsp;Tamar Abzhandadze ,&nbsp;Terence J. Quinn ,&nbsp;Katharina S. Sunnerhagen ,&nbsp;Erik Lundström","doi":"10.1016/j.cccb.2024.100222","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background and aims</h3><p>The Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) is a widely used instrument for assessing cognitive function in stroke survivors. To interpret changes in MoCA scores accurately, it is crucial to consider the minimal detectable change (MDC) and minimal clinically important difference (MCID). The aim was to establish the MDC and MCID of the MoCA within 6 months after stroke.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>This cohort study analysed data from the EFFECTS trial. The MoCA was administered at baseline and at 6-month follow-up. The MDC was calculated as the upper limit of the 95 % confidence interval of the standard error of the MoCA mean. The MCID was determined using anchor-based and distribution methods. The visual analogue recovery scale of the Stroke Impact Scale (SIS [primary anchor]) and Euro Quality of Life-5 Dimensions index (EQ-5D [confirmatory anchor]) were used as anchors. The distribution-based method, the Cohen benchmark effect size was chosen.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>In total, 1131 (mean age [SD], 71 [10.6] years) participants were included. The mean (SD) MoCA scores at admission and 6-month follow-up were 22 (5.2) and 25 (4.2), respectively. The MDC of the MoCA was 5.1 points. The anchor method yielded the MCIDs 2 and 1.6 points for SIS and EQ-5D, respectively. Using the distribution method, the MCID for the MoCA was 1 point.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>Even a small change in MoCA scores can be important for stroke survivors; however, larger differences are required to ensure that any difference in MoCA values is a true change and is not related to the inherent variation in the test. Due to small sample sizes, the results of the anchor analysis need to be interpreted with caution.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":72549,"journal":{"name":"Cerebral circulation - cognition and behavior","volume":"6 ","pages":"Article 100222"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666245024000230/pdfft?md5=391df657cf7b946bf7a1d9fc82b89103&pid=1-s2.0-S2666245024000230-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Is the difference real, is the difference relevant: the minimal detectable and clinically important changes in the Montreal Cognitive Assessment\",\"authors\":\"Elias Lindvall ,&nbsp;Tamar Abzhandadze ,&nbsp;Terence J. Quinn ,&nbsp;Katharina S. Sunnerhagen ,&nbsp;Erik Lundström\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.cccb.2024.100222\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Background and aims</h3><p>The Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) is a widely used instrument for assessing cognitive function in stroke survivors. To interpret changes in MoCA scores accurately, it is crucial to consider the minimal detectable change (MDC) and minimal clinically important difference (MCID). The aim was to establish the MDC and MCID of the MoCA within 6 months after stroke.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>This cohort study analysed data from the EFFECTS trial. The MoCA was administered at baseline and at 6-month follow-up. The MDC was calculated as the upper limit of the 95 % confidence interval of the standard error of the MoCA mean. The MCID was determined using anchor-based and distribution methods. The visual analogue recovery scale of the Stroke Impact Scale (SIS [primary anchor]) and Euro Quality of Life-5 Dimensions index (EQ-5D [confirmatory anchor]) were used as anchors. The distribution-based method, the Cohen benchmark effect size was chosen.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>In total, 1131 (mean age [SD], 71 [10.6] years) participants were included. The mean (SD) MoCA scores at admission and 6-month follow-up were 22 (5.2) and 25 (4.2), respectively. The MDC of the MoCA was 5.1 points. The anchor method yielded the MCIDs 2 and 1.6 points for SIS and EQ-5D, respectively. Using the distribution method, the MCID for the MoCA was 1 point.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>Even a small change in MoCA scores can be important for stroke survivors; however, larger differences are required to ensure that any difference in MoCA values is a true change and is not related to the inherent variation in the test. Due to small sample sizes, the results of the anchor analysis need to be interpreted with caution.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":72549,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Cerebral circulation - cognition and behavior\",\"volume\":\"6 \",\"pages\":\"Article 100222\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666245024000230/pdfft?md5=391df657cf7b946bf7a1d9fc82b89103&pid=1-s2.0-S2666245024000230-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Cerebral circulation - cognition and behavior\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666245024000230\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cerebral circulation - cognition and behavior","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666245024000230","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景和目的 蒙特利尔认知评估(MoCA)是一种广泛用于评估脑卒中幸存者认知功能的工具。要准确解释 MoCA 分数的变化,必须考虑最小可检测变化(MDC)和最小临床重要差异(MCID)。这项队列研究分析了 EFFECTS 试验的数据。在基线和随访 6 个月时进行了 MoCA 测试。MDC 计算为 MoCA 平均值标准误差 95% 置信区间的上限。MCID 采用锚定法和分布法确定。脑卒中影响量表(SIS [主要锚点])的视觉模拟恢复量表和欧洲生活质量-5维度指数(EQ-5D [确认锚点])被用作锚点。结果共纳入 1131 名参与者(平均年龄 [SD] 71 [10.6] 岁)。入院时和随访 6 个月时的 MoCA 平均得分(标清)分别为 22 (5.2) 分和 25 (4.2) 分。MoCA的MDC为5.1分。采用锚定法时,SIS 和 EQ-5D 的 MCID 分别为 2 分和 1.6 分。结论MoCA 评分的微小变化对中风幸存者来说都很重要;但是,需要更大的差异来确保 MoCA 值的任何差异都是真正的变化,而与测试的固有差异无关。由于样本量较小,需要谨慎解释锚点分析的结果。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Is the difference real, is the difference relevant: the minimal detectable and clinically important changes in the Montreal Cognitive Assessment

Background and aims

The Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) is a widely used instrument for assessing cognitive function in stroke survivors. To interpret changes in MoCA scores accurately, it is crucial to consider the minimal detectable change (MDC) and minimal clinically important difference (MCID). The aim was to establish the MDC and MCID of the MoCA within 6 months after stroke.

Methods

This cohort study analysed data from the EFFECTS trial. The MoCA was administered at baseline and at 6-month follow-up. The MDC was calculated as the upper limit of the 95 % confidence interval of the standard error of the MoCA mean. The MCID was determined using anchor-based and distribution methods. The visual analogue recovery scale of the Stroke Impact Scale (SIS [primary anchor]) and Euro Quality of Life-5 Dimensions index (EQ-5D [confirmatory anchor]) were used as anchors. The distribution-based method, the Cohen benchmark effect size was chosen.

Results

In total, 1131 (mean age [SD], 71 [10.6] years) participants were included. The mean (SD) MoCA scores at admission and 6-month follow-up were 22 (5.2) and 25 (4.2), respectively. The MDC of the MoCA was 5.1 points. The anchor method yielded the MCIDs 2 and 1.6 points for SIS and EQ-5D, respectively. Using the distribution method, the MCID for the MoCA was 1 point.

Conclusions

Even a small change in MoCA scores can be important for stroke survivors; however, larger differences are required to ensure that any difference in MoCA values is a true change and is not related to the inherent variation in the test. Due to small sample sizes, the results of the anchor analysis need to be interpreted with caution.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Cerebral circulation - cognition and behavior
Cerebral circulation - cognition and behavior Neurology, Clinical Neurology
CiteScore
2.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
14 weeks
×
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