利用阿尔茨海默氏症神经影像队列数据实现认知测试分数之间交叉的方法

IF 13 1区 医学 Q1 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
Sarah F. Ackley, Jingxuan Wang, Ruijia Chen, Tanisha G. Hill-Jarrett, L. Paloma Rojas-Saunero, Andrew Stokes, Sachin J. Shah, M. Maria Glymour, for the Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative
{"title":"利用阿尔茨海默氏症神经影像队列数据实现认知测试分数之间交叉的方法","authors":"Sarah F. Ackley,&nbsp;Jingxuan Wang,&nbsp;Ruijia Chen,&nbsp;Tanisha G. Hill-Jarrett,&nbsp;L. Paloma Rojas-Saunero,&nbsp;Andrew Stokes,&nbsp;Sachin J. Shah,&nbsp;M. Maria Glymour,&nbsp;for the Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative","doi":"10.1002/alz.14597","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> INTRODUCTION</h3>\n \n <p>Studies use multiple different instruments to measure dementia-related outcomes, making head-to-head comparisons of interventions difficult.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> METHODS</h3>\n \n <p>To address this gap, we developed two methods to crosswalk estimated treatment effects on cognitive outcomes that are flexible, broadly applicable, and do not rely on strong distributional assumptions.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> RESULTS</h3>\n \n <p>We present two methods to crosswalk effect estimates using one measure to estimates using another measure, illustrated with global cognitive measures from the Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (ADNI). Specifically, we develop crosswalks for the following measures and associated change scores over time: the clinical dementia rating scale sum of box (CDR-SB), Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA), and Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) scores. Finally, a setting in which crosswalking is not appropriate is illustrated with plasma phosphorylated tau (p-tau) concentration and global cognitive measures.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> DISCUSSION</h3>\n \n <p>Given the inconsistent collection and reporting of dementia and cognitive outcomes across studies, these crosswalking methods offer a valuable approach to harmonizing and comparing results reported on different scales.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Highlights</h3>\n \n <div>\n <ul>\n \n <li>Developed methods to crosswalk from one cognitive outcome to another in studies of dementia interventions.</li>\n \n <li>Methods illustrated using combinations of global cognitive tests: the CDR-SB, MoCA, and MMSE.</li>\n \n <li>Illustrates scenarios where crosswalking may not be appropriate for certain combinations of measures.</li>\n \n <li>Crosswalking methods support comparison of interventions with accurate error propagation.</li>\n \n <li>Facilitates inclusion of more studies in meta-analyses by increasing data comparability.</li>\n </ul>\n </div>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":7471,"journal":{"name":"Alzheimer's & Dementia","volume":"21 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":13.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/alz.14597","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Methods to crosswalk between cognitive test scores using data from the Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Cohort\",\"authors\":\"Sarah F. Ackley,&nbsp;Jingxuan Wang,&nbsp;Ruijia Chen,&nbsp;Tanisha G. Hill-Jarrett,&nbsp;L. Paloma Rojas-Saunero,&nbsp;Andrew Stokes,&nbsp;Sachin J. Shah,&nbsp;M. Maria Glymour,&nbsp;for the Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/alz.14597\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div>\\n \\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> INTRODUCTION</h3>\\n \\n <p>Studies use multiple different instruments to measure dementia-related outcomes, making head-to-head comparisons of interventions difficult.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> METHODS</h3>\\n \\n <p>To address this gap, we developed two methods to crosswalk estimated treatment effects on cognitive outcomes that are flexible, broadly applicable, and do not rely on strong distributional assumptions.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> RESULTS</h3>\\n \\n <p>We present two methods to crosswalk effect estimates using one measure to estimates using another measure, illustrated with global cognitive measures from the Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (ADNI). Specifically, we develop crosswalks for the following measures and associated change scores over time: the clinical dementia rating scale sum of box (CDR-SB), Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA), and Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) scores. Finally, a setting in which crosswalking is not appropriate is illustrated with plasma phosphorylated tau (p-tau) concentration and global cognitive measures.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> DISCUSSION</h3>\\n \\n <p>Given the inconsistent collection and reporting of dementia and cognitive outcomes across studies, these crosswalking methods offer a valuable approach to harmonizing and comparing results reported on different scales.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Highlights</h3>\\n \\n <div>\\n <ul>\\n \\n <li>Developed methods to crosswalk from one cognitive outcome to another in studies of dementia interventions.</li>\\n \\n <li>Methods illustrated using combinations of global cognitive tests: the CDR-SB, MoCA, and MMSE.</li>\\n \\n <li>Illustrates scenarios where crosswalking may not be appropriate for certain combinations of measures.</li>\\n \\n <li>Crosswalking methods support comparison of interventions with accurate error propagation.</li>\\n \\n <li>Facilitates inclusion of more studies in meta-analyses by increasing data comparability.</li>\\n </ul>\\n </div>\\n </section>\\n </div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":7471,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Alzheimer's & Dementia\",\"volume\":\"21 2\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":13.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-02-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/alz.14597\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Alzheimer's & Dementia\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/alz.14597\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Alzheimer's & Dementia","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/alz.14597","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Methods to crosswalk between cognitive test scores using data from the Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Cohort

Methods to crosswalk between cognitive test scores using data from the Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Cohort

INTRODUCTION

Studies use multiple different instruments to measure dementia-related outcomes, making head-to-head comparisons of interventions difficult.

METHODS

To address this gap, we developed two methods to crosswalk estimated treatment effects on cognitive outcomes that are flexible, broadly applicable, and do not rely on strong distributional assumptions.

RESULTS

We present two methods to crosswalk effect estimates using one measure to estimates using another measure, illustrated with global cognitive measures from the Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (ADNI). Specifically, we develop crosswalks for the following measures and associated change scores over time: the clinical dementia rating scale sum of box (CDR-SB), Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA), and Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) scores. Finally, a setting in which crosswalking is not appropriate is illustrated with plasma phosphorylated tau (p-tau) concentration and global cognitive measures.

DISCUSSION

Given the inconsistent collection and reporting of dementia and cognitive outcomes across studies, these crosswalking methods offer a valuable approach to harmonizing and comparing results reported on different scales.

Highlights

  • Developed methods to crosswalk from one cognitive outcome to another in studies of dementia interventions.
  • Methods illustrated using combinations of global cognitive tests: the CDR-SB, MoCA, and MMSE.
  • Illustrates scenarios where crosswalking may not be appropriate for certain combinations of measures.
  • Crosswalking methods support comparison of interventions with accurate error propagation.
  • Facilitates inclusion of more studies in meta-analyses by increasing data comparability.
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
Alzheimer's & Dementia
Alzheimer's & Dementia 医学-临床神经学
CiteScore
14.50
自引率
5.00%
发文量
299
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: Alzheimer's & Dementia is a peer-reviewed journal that aims to bridge knowledge gaps in dementia research by covering the entire spectrum, from basic science to clinical trials to social and behavioral investigations. It provides a platform for rapid communication of new findings and ideas, optimal translation of research into practical applications, increasing knowledge across diverse disciplines for early detection, diagnosis, and intervention, and identifying promising new research directions. In July 2008, Alzheimer's & Dementia was accepted for indexing by MEDLINE, recognizing its scientific merit and contribution to Alzheimer's research.
×
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