基于片剂的阿尔茨海默病前驱期图片命名评估:一种区分轻度认知障碍与正常衰老的可及且有效的工具

IF 2.2 4区 医学 Q3 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
Lauren Seidman, Sara Hyman, Rachel Kenney, Avivit Nsiri, Steven Galetta, Arjun V Masurkar, Laura Balcer
{"title":"基于片剂的阿尔茨海默病前驱期图片命名评估:一种区分轻度认知障碍与正常衰老的可及且有效的工具","authors":"Lauren Seidman, Sara Hyman, Rachel Kenney, Avivit Nsiri, Steven Galetta, Arjun V Masurkar, Laura Balcer","doi":"10.1159/000546451","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Effective mild cognitive impairment (MCI) screening requires accessible testing. This study compared two tests for distinguishing MCI patients from controls: rapid automatized naming (RAN) for naming speed and low-contrast letter acuity (LCLA) for sensitivity to low-contrast letters.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Two RAN tasks were used: the Mobile Universal Lexicon Evaluation System (MULES, picture naming) and the Staggered Uneven Number test (SUN, number naming). Both RAN tasks were administered on a tablet and in a paper/pencil format. The tablet format was administered using the Mobile Integrated Cognitive Kit application. LCLA was tested at 2.5% and 1.25% contrast.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Sixty-four participants (31 MCI, 34 controls; mean age 73.2 ± 6.8 years) were included. MCI patients were slower than controls for paper/pencil (75.0 vs. 53.6 s, p < 0.001), and tablet MULES (69.0 s vs. 50.2 s, p = 0.01). The paper/pencil SUN showed no significant difference (MCI: 59.5 s vs. controls: 59.9 s, p = 0.07) nor did the tablet SUN (MCI: 59.3 s vs. controls: 55.7 s, p = 0.36). MCI patients had worse performance on LCLA testing at 2.5% contrast (33 letters vs. 36, p = 0.04*) and 1.25% (0 letters vs. 14 letters, p < 0.001). Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis showed similar performance of paper/pencil and tablet MULES in distinguishing MCI from controls (area under the ROC curve [AUC] = 0.77), outperforming both SUN (AUC = 0.63 paper, 0.59 tablet) and LCLA (2.5% contrast: AUC = 0.65, 1.25% contrast: AUC = 0.72).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The MULES, in both formats, may be a valuable screening tool for MCI.</p>","PeriodicalId":11126,"journal":{"name":"Dementia and Geriatric Cognitive Disorders","volume":" ","pages":"1-12"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12240569/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Tablet-Based Assessment of Picture Naming in Prodromal Alzheimer's Disease: An Accessible and Effective Tool for Distinguishing Mild Cognitive Impairment from Normal Aging.\",\"authors\":\"Lauren Seidman, Sara Hyman, Rachel Kenney, Avivit Nsiri, Steven Galetta, Arjun V Masurkar, Laura Balcer\",\"doi\":\"10.1159/000546451\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Effective mild cognitive impairment (MCI) screening requires accessible testing. This study compared two tests for distinguishing MCI patients from controls: rapid automatized naming (RAN) for naming speed and low-contrast letter acuity (LCLA) for sensitivity to low-contrast letters.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Two RAN tasks were used: the Mobile Universal Lexicon Evaluation System (MULES, picture naming) and the Staggered Uneven Number test (SUN, number naming). Both RAN tasks were administered on a tablet and in a paper/pencil format. The tablet format was administered using the Mobile Integrated Cognitive Kit application. LCLA was tested at 2.5% and 1.25% contrast.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Sixty-four participants (31 MCI, 34 controls; mean age 73.2 ± 6.8 years) were included. MCI patients were slower than controls for paper/pencil (75.0 vs. 53.6 s, p < 0.001), and tablet MULES (69.0 s vs. 50.2 s, p = 0.01). The paper/pencil SUN showed no significant difference (MCI: 59.5 s vs. controls: 59.9 s, p = 0.07) nor did the tablet SUN (MCI: 59.3 s vs. controls: 55.7 s, p = 0.36). MCI patients had worse performance on LCLA testing at 2.5% contrast (33 letters vs. 36, p = 0.04*) and 1.25% (0 letters vs. 14 letters, p < 0.001). Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis showed similar performance of paper/pencil and tablet MULES in distinguishing MCI from controls (area under the ROC curve [AUC] = 0.77), outperforming both SUN (AUC = 0.63 paper, 0.59 tablet) and LCLA (2.5% contrast: AUC = 0.65, 1.25% contrast: AUC = 0.72).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The MULES, in both formats, may be a valuable screening tool for MCI.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":11126,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Dementia and Geriatric Cognitive Disorders\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1-12\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-06-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12240569/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Dementia and Geriatric Cognitive Disorders\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1159/000546451\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Dementia and Geriatric Cognitive Disorders","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1159/000546451","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","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

有效的轻度认知障碍(MCI)筛查需要可获得的测试。本研究比较了区分MCI患者和对照组的两种测试:快速自动命名(RAN)命名速度和低对比字母敏锐度(LCLA)对低对比字母的敏感性。使用了两个RAN任务:移动通用词典评价系统(MULES,图片命名)和交错不平数测试(SUN,数字命名)。这两项RAN任务都是在平板电脑和纸/笔格式上进行的。使用移动集成认知工具包(MICK)应用程序进行片剂形式的管理。在2.5%和1.25%对比度下检测LCLA。64名参与者(MCI 31名,对照组34名;平均年龄(73.2±6.8岁)。MCI患者使用纸/铅笔(75.0秒比53.6秒,p < 0.001)和平板MULES(69.0秒比50.2秒,p = 0.01)比对照组慢。纸/铅笔的SUN无显著差异(MCI: 59.5秒vs.对照组:59.9秒,p = 0.07),平板电脑的SUN也无显著差异(MCI: 59.3秒vs.对照组:55.7秒,p = 0.36)。MCI患者在LCLA测试中的表现较差,对比为2.5%(33个字母对36个字母,p = 0.04*)和1.25%(0个字母对14个字母)。字母,p < 0.001)。受试者工作特征(ROC)分析显示,纸/铅笔和平板MULES在区分MCI与对照组的表现相似(AUC = 0.77),优于SUN (AUC = 0.63纸,0.59片)和LCLA(2.5%对比:AUC = 0.65, 1.25%对比:AUC = 0.72)。两种格式的MULES可能是MCI的有价值的筛选工具。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Tablet-Based Assessment of Picture Naming in Prodromal Alzheimer's Disease: An Accessible and Effective Tool for Distinguishing Mild Cognitive Impairment from Normal Aging.

Introduction: Effective mild cognitive impairment (MCI) screening requires accessible testing. This study compared two tests for distinguishing MCI patients from controls: rapid automatized naming (RAN) for naming speed and low-contrast letter acuity (LCLA) for sensitivity to low-contrast letters.

Methods: Two RAN tasks were used: the Mobile Universal Lexicon Evaluation System (MULES, picture naming) and the Staggered Uneven Number test (SUN, number naming). Both RAN tasks were administered on a tablet and in a paper/pencil format. The tablet format was administered using the Mobile Integrated Cognitive Kit application. LCLA was tested at 2.5% and 1.25% contrast.

Results: Sixty-four participants (31 MCI, 34 controls; mean age 73.2 ± 6.8 years) were included. MCI patients were slower than controls for paper/pencil (75.0 vs. 53.6 s, p < 0.001), and tablet MULES (69.0 s vs. 50.2 s, p = 0.01). The paper/pencil SUN showed no significant difference (MCI: 59.5 s vs. controls: 59.9 s, p = 0.07) nor did the tablet SUN (MCI: 59.3 s vs. controls: 55.7 s, p = 0.36). MCI patients had worse performance on LCLA testing at 2.5% contrast (33 letters vs. 36, p = 0.04*) and 1.25% (0 letters vs. 14 letters, p < 0.001). Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis showed similar performance of paper/pencil and tablet MULES in distinguishing MCI from controls (area under the ROC curve [AUC] = 0.77), outperforming both SUN (AUC = 0.63 paper, 0.59 tablet) and LCLA (2.5% contrast: AUC = 0.65, 1.25% contrast: AUC = 0.72).

Conclusion: The MULES, in both formats, may be a valuable screening tool for MCI.

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
CiteScore
4.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
46
审稿时长
2 months
期刊介绍: As a unique forum devoted exclusively to the study of cognitive dysfunction, ''Dementia and Geriatric Cognitive Disorders'' concentrates on Alzheimer’s and Parkinson’s disease, Huntington’s chorea and other neurodegenerative diseases. The journal draws from diverse related research disciplines such as psychogeriatrics, neuropsychology, clinical neurology, morphology, physiology, genetic molecular biology, pathology, biochemistry, immunology, pharmacology and pharmaceutics. Strong emphasis is placed on the publication of research findings from animal studies which are complemented by clinical and therapeutic experience to give an overall appreciation of the field.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信