认知筛查测试的年龄和教育修正后果--意大利 MoCA 测试模拟研究。

IF 2.7 4区 医学 Q2 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
Neurological Sciences Pub Date : 2024-12-01 Epub Date: 2024-07-16 DOI:10.1007/s10072-024-07691-6
Hans-Aloys Wischmann, Giancarlo Logroscino, Tobias Kurth, Marco Piccininni
{"title":"认知筛查测试的年龄和教育修正后果--意大利 MoCA 测试模拟研究。","authors":"Hans-Aloys Wischmann, Giancarlo Logroscino, Tobias Kurth, Marco Piccininni","doi":"10.1007/s10072-024-07691-6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Cognitive screening tools are widely used in clinical practice to screen for age-related cognitive impairment and dementia. These tools' test scores are known to be influenced by age and education, leading to routine correction of raw scores for these factors. Despite these corrections being common practice, there is evidence suggesting that corrected scores may perform worse in terms of discrimination than raw scores.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To address the ongoing debate in the field of dementia research, we assessed the impact of the corrections on discrimination, specificity, and sensitivity of the Montreal Cognitive Assessment test in Italy, both for the overall population and across age and education strata.</p><p><strong>Methodology: </strong>We created a realistic model of the resident population in Italy in terms of age, education, cognitive impairment and test scores, and performed a simulation study.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We confirmed that the discrimination performance was higher for raw scores than for corrected scores in discriminating patients with cognitive impairment from individuals without (areas under the curve of 0.947 and 0.923 respectively). With thresholds determined on the overall population, raw scores showed higher sensitivities for higher-risk age-education groups and higher specificities for lower-risk groups. Conversely, corrected scores showed uniform sensitivity and specificity across demographic strata, and thus better performance for certain age-education groups.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Raw and corrected scores show different performances due to the underlying causal relationships between the variables. Each approach has advantages and disadvantages, the optimal choice between raw and corrected scores depends on the aims and preferences of practitioners and policymakers.</p>","PeriodicalId":19191,"journal":{"name":"Neurological Sciences","volume":" ","pages":"5697-5706"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11554764/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Consequences of age and education correction of cognitive screening tests - A simulation study of the MoCA test in Italy.\",\"authors\":\"Hans-Aloys Wischmann, Giancarlo Logroscino, Tobias Kurth, Marco Piccininni\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s10072-024-07691-6\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Cognitive screening tools are widely used in clinical practice to screen for age-related cognitive impairment and dementia. These tools' test scores are known to be influenced by age and education, leading to routine correction of raw scores for these factors. Despite these corrections being common practice, there is evidence suggesting that corrected scores may perform worse in terms of discrimination than raw scores.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To address the ongoing debate in the field of dementia research, we assessed the impact of the corrections on discrimination, specificity, and sensitivity of the Montreal Cognitive Assessment test in Italy, both for the overall population and across age and education strata.</p><p><strong>Methodology: </strong>We created a realistic model of the resident population in Italy in terms of age, education, cognitive impairment and test scores, and performed a simulation study.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We confirmed that the discrimination performance was higher for raw scores than for corrected scores in discriminating patients with cognitive impairment from individuals without (areas under the curve of 0.947 and 0.923 respectively). With thresholds determined on the overall population, raw scores showed higher sensitivities for higher-risk age-education groups and higher specificities for lower-risk groups. Conversely, corrected scores showed uniform sensitivity and specificity across demographic strata, and thus better performance for certain age-education groups.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Raw and corrected scores show different performances due to the underlying causal relationships between the variables. Each approach has advantages and disadvantages, the optimal choice between raw and corrected scores depends on the aims and preferences of practitioners and policymakers.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":19191,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Neurological Sciences\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"5697-5706\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11554764/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Neurological Sciences\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10072-024-07691-6\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/7/16 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Neurological Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10072-024-07691-6","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/7/16 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:认知筛查工具在临床实践中被广泛用于筛查与年龄相关的认知障碍和痴呆症。众所周知,这些工具的测试分数会受到年龄和教育程度的影响,因此常规做法是根据这些因素对原始分数进行校正。尽管这些修正已成为常规做法,但有证据表明,修正后的分数在辨别能力方面可能不如原始分数:为了解决痴呆症研究领域正在进行的争论,我们在意大利评估了修正对蒙特利尔认知评估测试的区分度、特异性和灵敏度的影响,既包括总体人群,也包括不同年龄和教育程度的人群:我们根据意大利常住人口的年龄、教育程度、认知障碍和测试分数创建了一个现实模型,并进行了模拟研究:结果:我们证实,在区分认知障碍患者和非认知障碍患者时,原始分数的区分度高于校正分数(曲线下面积分别为 0.947 和 0.923)。根据总体人群确定的阈值,原始分数对高风险年龄-教育群体显示出更高的敏感性,而对低风险群体则显示出更高的特异性。相反,校正后的分数在不同人口阶层显示出统一的灵敏度和特异性,因此在某些年龄教育群体中表现更好:结论:原始分数和校正分数由于变量之间的内在因果关系而表现出不同的性能。两种方法各有利弊,原始分数和校正分数之间的最佳选择取决于实践者和决策者的目标和偏好。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Consequences of age and education correction of cognitive screening tests - A simulation study of the MoCA test in Italy.

Consequences of age and education correction of cognitive screening tests - A simulation study of the MoCA test in Italy.

Background: Cognitive screening tools are widely used in clinical practice to screen for age-related cognitive impairment and dementia. These tools' test scores are known to be influenced by age and education, leading to routine correction of raw scores for these factors. Despite these corrections being common practice, there is evidence suggesting that corrected scores may perform worse in terms of discrimination than raw scores.

Objective: To address the ongoing debate in the field of dementia research, we assessed the impact of the corrections on discrimination, specificity, and sensitivity of the Montreal Cognitive Assessment test in Italy, both for the overall population and across age and education strata.

Methodology: We created a realistic model of the resident population in Italy in terms of age, education, cognitive impairment and test scores, and performed a simulation study.

Results: We confirmed that the discrimination performance was higher for raw scores than for corrected scores in discriminating patients with cognitive impairment from individuals without (areas under the curve of 0.947 and 0.923 respectively). With thresholds determined on the overall population, raw scores showed higher sensitivities for higher-risk age-education groups and higher specificities for lower-risk groups. Conversely, corrected scores showed uniform sensitivity and specificity across demographic strata, and thus better performance for certain age-education groups.

Conclusion: Raw and corrected scores show different performances due to the underlying causal relationships between the variables. Each approach has advantages and disadvantages, the optimal choice between raw and corrected scores depends on the aims and preferences of practitioners and policymakers.

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
Neurological Sciences
Neurological Sciences 医学-临床神经学
CiteScore
6.10
自引率
3.00%
发文量
743
审稿时长
4 months
期刊介绍: Neurological Sciences is intended to provide a medium for the communication of results and ideas in the field of neuroscience. The journal welcomes contributions in both the basic and clinical aspects of the neurosciences. The official language of the journal is English. Reports are published in the form of original articles, short communications, editorials, reviews and letters to the editor. Original articles present the results of experimental or clinical studies in the neurosciences, while short communications are succinct reports permitting the rapid publication of novel results. Original contributions may be submitted for the special sections History of Neurology, Health Care and Neurological Digressions - a forum for cultural topics related to the neurosciences. The journal also publishes correspondence book reviews, meeting reports and announcements.
×
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