80-89岁成人的简短视觉空间记忆测试-修正的规范数据和形式等效性。

The Clinical neuropsychologist Pub Date : 2022-08-01 Epub Date: 2020-10-06 DOI:10.1080/13854046.2020.1824279
Jessica Powell, Lauren Blake, Kathryn Wyman-Chick, Michael Daniel
{"title":"80-89岁成人的简短视觉空间记忆测试-修正的规范数据和形式等效性。","authors":"Jessica Powell,&nbsp;Lauren Blake,&nbsp;Kathryn Wyman-Chick,&nbsp;Michael Daniel","doi":"10.1080/13854046.2020.1824279","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Objective:</b> To provide normative data and examine form equivalency of the Brief Visuospatial Memory Test-Revised (BVMT-R) in a sample of 9<sup>th</sup> decade adults. <b>Method:</b> The sample was comprised of 90 healthy individuals ages 80-84 (n = 42) and 85-89 (n = 48). The average years of education was 14.8 (2.4). The BVMT-R Forms 1 and 4 were administered in a counterbalanced order, one week apart. Form equivalency was conducted utilizing Analysis of Variance (ANOVA). <b>Results:</b> There were no significant gender, education, or MMSE differences between the two age groups or between the counterbalanced subgroups. There were no significant differences between Forms 1 and 4 for the 80-84 age group. However, BVMT-R Form 1 Trial 1 and Total Recall raw scores were significantly higher than those for Form 4 in the 85-89 age group. <b>Conclusions:</b> Individuals in their early 80s obtained comparable scores on Forms 1 and 4 of the BVMT-R; however, individuals in their late 80 s showed more difficulty learning and recalling information presented in Form 4 compared to Form 1. It is recommended that clinicians consider form-specific normative data with this population.</p>","PeriodicalId":197334,"journal":{"name":"The Clinical neuropsychologist","volume":" ","pages":"1589-1598"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/13854046.2020.1824279","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Brief visuospatial memory test-revised normative data and form equivalency for adults ages 80-89.\",\"authors\":\"Jessica Powell,&nbsp;Lauren Blake,&nbsp;Kathryn Wyman-Chick,&nbsp;Michael Daniel\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/13854046.2020.1824279\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p><b>Objective:</b> To provide normative data and examine form equivalency of the Brief Visuospatial Memory Test-Revised (BVMT-R) in a sample of 9<sup>th</sup> decade adults. <b>Method:</b> The sample was comprised of 90 healthy individuals ages 80-84 (n = 42) and 85-89 (n = 48). The average years of education was 14.8 (2.4). The BVMT-R Forms 1 and 4 were administered in a counterbalanced order, one week apart. Form equivalency was conducted utilizing Analysis of Variance (ANOVA). <b>Results:</b> There were no significant gender, education, or MMSE differences between the two age groups or between the counterbalanced subgroups. There were no significant differences between Forms 1 and 4 for the 80-84 age group. However, BVMT-R Form 1 Trial 1 and Total Recall raw scores were significantly higher than those for Form 4 in the 85-89 age group. <b>Conclusions:</b> Individuals in their early 80s obtained comparable scores on Forms 1 and 4 of the BVMT-R; however, individuals in their late 80 s showed more difficulty learning and recalling information presented in Form 4 compared to Form 1. It is recommended that clinicians consider form-specific normative data with this population.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":197334,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"The Clinical neuropsychologist\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1589-1598\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-08-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/13854046.2020.1824279\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"The Clinical neuropsychologist\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/13854046.2020.1824279\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2020/10/6 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Clinical neuropsychologist","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13854046.2020.1824279","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2020/10/6 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:为90多岁成人的视觉空间记忆简易测试(BVMT-R)提供规范性数据并检验其形式等效性。方法:选取80 ~ 84岁(n = 42)和85 ~ 89岁(n = 48)的健康个体90例。平均受教育年限为14.8年(2.4年)。BVMT-R表1和表4以平衡顺序进行,间隔一周。形式等效性采用方差分析(ANOVA)进行分析。结果:两个年龄组之间或平衡亚组之间没有显著的性别、教育程度或MMSE差异。在80-84岁年龄组中,中一和中四之间没有显著差异。85 ~ 89岁年龄组BVMT-R表1试1和总回忆原始得分显著高于表4。结论:80岁出头的个体在BVMT-R表1和表4的得分具有可比性;然而,80多岁的人在学习和回忆表4中的信息时比表1表现出更大的困难。建议临床医生考虑这一人群的特定形式的规范数据。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Brief visuospatial memory test-revised normative data and form equivalency for adults ages 80-89.

Objective: To provide normative data and examine form equivalency of the Brief Visuospatial Memory Test-Revised (BVMT-R) in a sample of 9th decade adults. Method: The sample was comprised of 90 healthy individuals ages 80-84 (n = 42) and 85-89 (n = 48). The average years of education was 14.8 (2.4). The BVMT-R Forms 1 and 4 were administered in a counterbalanced order, one week apart. Form equivalency was conducted utilizing Analysis of Variance (ANOVA). Results: There were no significant gender, education, or MMSE differences between the two age groups or between the counterbalanced subgroups. There were no significant differences between Forms 1 and 4 for the 80-84 age group. However, BVMT-R Form 1 Trial 1 and Total Recall raw scores were significantly higher than those for Form 4 in the 85-89 age group. Conclusions: Individuals in their early 80s obtained comparable scores on Forms 1 and 4 of the BVMT-R; however, individuals in their late 80 s showed more difficulty learning and recalling information presented in Form 4 compared to Form 1. It is recommended that clinicians consider form-specific normative data with this population.

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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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