脊髓小脑共济失调综合评分作为衡量脊髓小脑共济失调患者疾病进展的内容效度。

IF 2.4 3区 医学 Q3 NEUROSCIENCES
Michele Potashman, Maggie Heinrich, Katja Rudell, Linda Abetz-Webb, Naomi Suminski, Rinchen Doma, Kavita Jarodia, Mahak Jain, Chris Buckley, Melissa Wolfe-Beiner, Vlad Coric, Susan Perlman, Liana Rosenthal, Jeremy Schmahmann, Gilbert L'Italien
{"title":"脊髓小脑共济失调综合评分作为衡量脊髓小脑共济失调患者疾病进展的内容效度。","authors":"Michele Potashman, Maggie Heinrich, Katja Rudell, Linda Abetz-Webb, Naomi Suminski, Rinchen Doma, Kavita Jarodia, Mahak Jain, Chris Buckley, Melissa Wolfe-Beiner, Vlad Coric, Susan Perlman, Liana Rosenthal, Jeremy Schmahmann, Gilbert L'Italien","doi":"10.1007/s12311-025-01896-x","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Spinocerebellar ataxia (SCA) composite score (SCACOMS) is a statistically-derived composite measure comprising weighted items that are sensitive to change during early-stage disease. SCACOMS items and weights include the functional Scale for the Assessment and Rating of Ataxia Gait (12%), Stance (17%), Sitting (8%), and Speech (10%) items, and the Clinician Global Impression of Change (CGI) (53%). The content validity of SCACOMS is yet to be established. Semi-structured qualitative interviews were conducted with individuals with SCA (N = 24) and healthcare professionals (HCPs) who treat SCA (N = 2) to evaluate the relevance and weighting of SCACOMS items for assessment of SCA progression. Interviews were audio recorded, transcribed, coded, and analyzed using ATLAS.Ti v23 software, following established methods. SCACOMS items measured all sign and symptom concepts reported by > 50.0% of individuals with SCA, including difficulties with speech (79.2%), balance (75.0%), and gait (66.7%). Of SCACOMS items, individuals with SCA ranked Gait as most important for assessing disease progression (45.8%) and CGI as least important (58.3%). When weighting SCACOMS items, individuals with SCA assigned the highest weight to Gait (mean [standard deviation], 32.8% [13.24]) and the lowest weight to Sitting (12.9% [7.98]). HCPs varied the item weights dependent on SCA severity. Agreement with the statistically-derived weighting of SCACOMS varied, with 41.6% of individuals with SCA indicating that CGI weighting was too high. Overall, all participants indicated that SCACOMS could detect meaningful changes and/or disease stabilization. This study supports the content validity of SCACOMS in SCA; however, SCACOMS item weights may warrant adjustment.</p>","PeriodicalId":50706,"journal":{"name":"Cerebellum","volume":"24 5","pages":"146"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12401751/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Content Validity of the Spinocerebellar Ataxia Composite Score as a Measure of Disease Progression in Patients with Spinocerebellar Ataxia.\",\"authors\":\"Michele Potashman, Maggie Heinrich, Katja Rudell, Linda Abetz-Webb, Naomi Suminski, Rinchen Doma, Kavita Jarodia, Mahak Jain, Chris Buckley, Melissa Wolfe-Beiner, Vlad Coric, Susan Perlman, Liana Rosenthal, Jeremy Schmahmann, Gilbert L'Italien\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s12311-025-01896-x\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Spinocerebellar ataxia (SCA) composite score (SCACOMS) is a statistically-derived composite measure comprising weighted items that are sensitive to change during early-stage disease. SCACOMS items and weights include the functional Scale for the Assessment and Rating of Ataxia Gait (12%), Stance (17%), Sitting (8%), and Speech (10%) items, and the Clinician Global Impression of Change (CGI) (53%). The content validity of SCACOMS is yet to be established. Semi-structured qualitative interviews were conducted with individuals with SCA (N = 24) and healthcare professionals (HCPs) who treat SCA (N = 2) to evaluate the relevance and weighting of SCACOMS items for assessment of SCA progression. Interviews were audio recorded, transcribed, coded, and analyzed using ATLAS.Ti v23 software, following established methods. SCACOMS items measured all sign and symptom concepts reported by > 50.0% of individuals with SCA, including difficulties with speech (79.2%), balance (75.0%), and gait (66.7%). Of SCACOMS items, individuals with SCA ranked Gait as most important for assessing disease progression (45.8%) and CGI as least important (58.3%). When weighting SCACOMS items, individuals with SCA assigned the highest weight to Gait (mean [standard deviation], 32.8% [13.24]) and the lowest weight to Sitting (12.9% [7.98]). HCPs varied the item weights dependent on SCA severity. Agreement with the statistically-derived weighting of SCACOMS varied, with 41.6% of individuals with SCA indicating that CGI weighting was too high. Overall, all participants indicated that SCACOMS could detect meaningful changes and/or disease stabilization. This study supports the content validity of SCACOMS in SCA; however, SCACOMS item weights may warrant adjustment.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50706,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Cerebellum\",\"volume\":\"24 5\",\"pages\":\"146\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12401751/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Cerebellum\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s12311-025-01896-x\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"NEUROSCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cerebellum","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s12311-025-01896-x","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"NEUROSCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

脊髓小脑性共济失调(SCA)综合评分(SCACOMS)是一种统计衍生的综合测量方法,包括对早期疾病变化敏感的加权项目。SCACOMS项目和权重包括失共济失调步态评估和评级功能量表(12%)、姿态(17%)、坐姿(8%)和言语(10%)项目,以及临床医生总体变化印象(CGI)(53%)。SCACOMS的内容效度尚未确定。对患有SCA的个体(N = 24)和治疗SCA的医疗保健专业人员(HCPs) (N = 2)进行半结构化定性访谈,以评估SCACOMS项目与SCA进展评估的相关性和权重。使用ATLAS对访谈进行录音、转录、编码和分析。Ti v23软件,遵循既定方法。SCACOMS项目测量了50.0% SCA患者报告的所有体征和症状概念,包括言语困难(79.2%)、平衡困难(75.0%)和步态困难(66.7%)。在SCACOMS项目中,患有SCA的个体认为步态是评估疾病进展最重要的(45.8%),CGI最不重要(58.3%)。当SCACOMS项目加权时,患有SCA的个体将最高权重分配给步态(平均值[标准差],32.8%[13.24]),将最低权重分配给坐姿(12.9%[7.98])。HCPs根据SCA的严重程度改变了项目权重。与SCACOMS统计得出的权重的一致性各不相同,41.6%的SCA个体认为CGI权重过高。总体而言,所有参与者都表示SCACOMS可以检测到有意义的变化和/或疾病稳定。本研究支持SCA中SCACOMS的内容效度;然而,SCACOMS项目权重可能需要调整。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Content Validity of the Spinocerebellar Ataxia Composite Score as a Measure of Disease Progression in Patients with Spinocerebellar Ataxia.

Content Validity of the Spinocerebellar Ataxia Composite Score as a Measure of Disease Progression in Patients with Spinocerebellar Ataxia.

Content Validity of the Spinocerebellar Ataxia Composite Score as a Measure of Disease Progression in Patients with Spinocerebellar Ataxia.

Content Validity of the Spinocerebellar Ataxia Composite Score as a Measure of Disease Progression in Patients with Spinocerebellar Ataxia.

Spinocerebellar ataxia (SCA) composite score (SCACOMS) is a statistically-derived composite measure comprising weighted items that are sensitive to change during early-stage disease. SCACOMS items and weights include the functional Scale for the Assessment and Rating of Ataxia Gait (12%), Stance (17%), Sitting (8%), and Speech (10%) items, and the Clinician Global Impression of Change (CGI) (53%). The content validity of SCACOMS is yet to be established. Semi-structured qualitative interviews were conducted with individuals with SCA (N = 24) and healthcare professionals (HCPs) who treat SCA (N = 2) to evaluate the relevance and weighting of SCACOMS items for assessment of SCA progression. Interviews were audio recorded, transcribed, coded, and analyzed using ATLAS.Ti v23 software, following established methods. SCACOMS items measured all sign and symptom concepts reported by > 50.0% of individuals with SCA, including difficulties with speech (79.2%), balance (75.0%), and gait (66.7%). Of SCACOMS items, individuals with SCA ranked Gait as most important for assessing disease progression (45.8%) and CGI as least important (58.3%). When weighting SCACOMS items, individuals with SCA assigned the highest weight to Gait (mean [standard deviation], 32.8% [13.24]) and the lowest weight to Sitting (12.9% [7.98]). HCPs varied the item weights dependent on SCA severity. Agreement with the statistically-derived weighting of SCACOMS varied, with 41.6% of individuals with SCA indicating that CGI weighting was too high. Overall, all participants indicated that SCACOMS could detect meaningful changes and/or disease stabilization. This study supports the content validity of SCACOMS in SCA; however, SCACOMS item weights may warrant adjustment.

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
Cerebellum
Cerebellum 医学-神经科学
CiteScore
6.40
自引率
14.30%
发文量
150
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Official publication of the Society for Research on the Cerebellum devoted to genetics of cerebellar ataxias, role of cerebellum in motor control and cognitive function, and amid an ageing population, diseases associated with cerebellar dysfunction. The Cerebellum is a central source for the latest developments in fundamental neurosciences including molecular and cellular biology; behavioural neurosciences and neurochemistry; genetics; fundamental and clinical neurophysiology; neurology and neuropathology; cognition and neuroimaging. The Cerebellum benefits neuroscientists in molecular and cellular biology; neurophysiologists; researchers in neurotransmission; neurologists; radiologists; paediatricians; neuropsychologists; students of neurology and psychiatry and others.
×
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