Yael De Picciotto, Avigail Lithwick Algon, Inbal Amit, Eli Vakil, William Saban
{"title":"小脑共济失调患者远程MoCA管理有效性的大规模证据。","authors":"Yael De Picciotto, Avigail Lithwick Algon, Inbal Amit, Eli Vakil, William Saban","doi":"10.1080/13854046.2024.2397835","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Objective</b>: For over half a century, studies of rare diseases using in-person cognitive tools have faced challenges, such as long study periods and small sample sizes (e.g. <i>n</i> = 10). The Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) was widely employed to assess mild cognitive impairment (MCI). We aimed to validate a modified online version of the MoCA in a large sample of a rare disease (population prevalence < .01%). <b>Method</b>: First, we analyzed 20 previous findings (<i>n</i> = 1,377), comparing the MoCA scores between large groups of neurotypically healthy (NH; <i>n</i> = 837) and cerebellar ataxia (CA; <i>n</i> = 540), where studies were conducted in-person. Second, we administered the MoCA in-person to a group of NH (<i>n</i> = 41) and a large group of CA (<i>n</i> = 103). Third, we administered a video conferencing version of the MoCA to NH (<i>n</i> = 38) and a large group of CA (<i>n</i> = 83). <b>Results</b>: We observed no performance differences between online and in-person MoCA administration in the NH and CA groups (<i>p</i> > .05, <i>η</i><sup>2</sup> = 0.001), supporting reliability. Additionally, our online CA group had lower MoCA scores than the NH group (<i>p</i> < .001, Hedges' <i>g</i> = 0.68). This result is consistent with previous studies, as demonstrated by our forest plot across 20 previous in-person findings, supporting construct validity. <b>Conclusion</b>: The results indicate that an online screening tool is valid in a large sample of individuals with CA. Online testing is not only time and cost-effective, but facilitates disease management and monitoring, ultimately enabling early detection of MCI.</p>","PeriodicalId":55250,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Neuropsychologist","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Large-scale evidence for the validity of remote MoCA administration among people with cerebellar ataxia.\",\"authors\":\"Yael De Picciotto, Avigail Lithwick Algon, Inbal Amit, Eli Vakil, William Saban\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/13854046.2024.2397835\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p><b>Objective</b>: For over half a century, studies of rare diseases using in-person cognitive tools have faced challenges, such as long study periods and small sample sizes (e.g. <i>n</i> = 10). The Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) was widely employed to assess mild cognitive impairment (MCI). We aimed to validate a modified online version of the MoCA in a large sample of a rare disease (population prevalence < .01%). <b>Method</b>: First, we analyzed 20 previous findings (<i>n</i> = 1,377), comparing the MoCA scores between large groups of neurotypically healthy (NH; <i>n</i> = 837) and cerebellar ataxia (CA; <i>n</i> = 540), where studies were conducted in-person. Second, we administered the MoCA in-person to a group of NH (<i>n</i> = 41) and a large group of CA (<i>n</i> = 103). Third, we administered a video conferencing version of the MoCA to NH (<i>n</i> = 38) and a large group of CA (<i>n</i> = 83). <b>Results</b>: We observed no performance differences between online and in-person MoCA administration in the NH and CA groups (<i>p</i> > .05, <i>η</i><sup>2</sup> = 0.001), supporting reliability. Additionally, our online CA group had lower MoCA scores than the NH group (<i>p</i> < .001, Hedges' <i>g</i> = 0.68). This result is consistent with previous studies, as demonstrated by our forest plot across 20 previous in-person findings, supporting construct validity. <b>Conclusion</b>: The results indicate that an online screening tool is valid in a large sample of individuals with CA. Online testing is not only time and cost-effective, but facilitates disease management and monitoring, ultimately enabling early detection of MCI.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":55250,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Clinical Neuropsychologist\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-05\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Clinical Neuropsychologist\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/13854046.2024.2397835\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical Neuropsychologist","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13854046.2024.2397835","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Large-scale evidence for the validity of remote MoCA administration among people with cerebellar ataxia.
Objective: For over half a century, studies of rare diseases using in-person cognitive tools have faced challenges, such as long study periods and small sample sizes (e.g. n = 10). The Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) was widely employed to assess mild cognitive impairment (MCI). We aimed to validate a modified online version of the MoCA in a large sample of a rare disease (population prevalence < .01%). Method: First, we analyzed 20 previous findings (n = 1,377), comparing the MoCA scores between large groups of neurotypically healthy (NH; n = 837) and cerebellar ataxia (CA; n = 540), where studies were conducted in-person. Second, we administered the MoCA in-person to a group of NH (n = 41) and a large group of CA (n = 103). Third, we administered a video conferencing version of the MoCA to NH (n = 38) and a large group of CA (n = 83). Results: We observed no performance differences between online and in-person MoCA administration in the NH and CA groups (p > .05, η2 = 0.001), supporting reliability. Additionally, our online CA group had lower MoCA scores than the NH group (p < .001, Hedges' g = 0.68). This result is consistent with previous studies, as demonstrated by our forest plot across 20 previous in-person findings, supporting construct validity. Conclusion: The results indicate that an online screening tool is valid in a large sample of individuals with CA. Online testing is not only time and cost-effective, but facilitates disease management and monitoring, ultimately enabling early detection of MCI.
期刊介绍:
The Clinical Neuropsychologist (TCN) serves as the premier forum for (1) state-of-the-art clinically-relevant scientific research, (2) in-depth professional discussions of matters germane to evidence-based practice, and (3) clinical case studies in neuropsychology. Of particular interest are papers that can make definitive statements about a given topic (thereby having implications for the standards of clinical practice) and those with the potential to expand today’s clinical frontiers. Research on all age groups, and on both clinical and normal populations, is considered.