Validation of the test for finding word retrieval deficits (WoFi) in detecting Alzheimer's disease in a naturalistic clinical setting.

IF 3.7 2区 社会学 Q1 GERONTOLOGY European Journal of Ageing Pub Date : 2023-06-30 DOI:10.1007/s10433-023-00772-z
Eleni-Zacharoula Georgiou, Maria Skondra, Marina Charalampopoulou, Panagiotis Felemegkas, Asimina Pachi, Georgia Stafylidou, Dimitrios Papazachariou, Robert Perneczky, Vasileios Thomopoulos, Antonios Politis, Iracema Leroi, Polychronis Economou, Panagiotis Alexopoulos
{"title":"Validation of the test for finding word retrieval deficits (WoFi) in detecting Alzheimer's disease in a naturalistic clinical setting.","authors":"Eleni-Zacharoula Georgiou,&nbsp;Maria Skondra,&nbsp;Marina Charalampopoulou,&nbsp;Panagiotis Felemegkas,&nbsp;Asimina Pachi,&nbsp;Georgia Stafylidou,&nbsp;Dimitrios Papazachariou,&nbsp;Robert Perneczky,&nbsp;Vasileios Thomopoulos,&nbsp;Antonios Politis,&nbsp;Iracema Leroi,&nbsp;Polychronis Economou,&nbsp;Panagiotis Alexopoulos","doi":"10.1007/s10433-023-00772-z","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Detecting impaired naming capacity contributes to the detection of mild (MildND) and major (MajorND) neurocognitive disorder due to Alzheimer's disease (AD). The Test for Finding Word retrieval deficits (WoFi) is a new, 50-item, auditory stimuli-based instrument.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>The study aimed to adapt WoFi to the Greek language, to develop a short version of WoFi (WoFi-brief), to compare the item frequency and the utility of both instruments with the naming subtest of the widely used Addenbrooke's cognitive examination III (ACEIIINaming) in detecting MildND and MajorND due to AD.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This cross-sectional, validation study included 99 individuals without neurocognitive disorder, as well as 114 and 49 patients with MildND and MajorND due to AD, respectively. The analyses included categorical principal components analysis using Cramer's V, assessment of the frequency of test items based on corpora of television subtitles, comparison analyses, Kernel Fisher discriminant analysis models, proportional odds logistic regression (POLR) models and stratified repeated random subsampling used to recursive partitioning to training and validation set (70/30 ratio).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>WoFi and WoFi-brief, which consists of 16 items, have comparable item frequency and utility and outperform ACEIIINaming. According to the results of the discriminant analysis, the misclassification error was 30.9%, 33.6% and 42.4% for WoFi, WoFi-brief and ACEIIINaming, respectively. In the validation regression model including WoFi the mean misclassification error was 33%, while in those including WoFi-brief and ACEIIINaming it was 31% and 34%, respectively.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>WoFi and WoFi-brief are more effective in detecting MildND and MajorND due to AD than ACEIIINaming.</p>","PeriodicalId":47766,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Ageing","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.7000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10313575/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Ageing","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10433-023-00772-z","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"GERONTOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Detecting impaired naming capacity contributes to the detection of mild (MildND) and major (MajorND) neurocognitive disorder due to Alzheimer's disease (AD). The Test for Finding Word retrieval deficits (WoFi) is a new, 50-item, auditory stimuli-based instrument.

Objective: The study aimed to adapt WoFi to the Greek language, to develop a short version of WoFi (WoFi-brief), to compare the item frequency and the utility of both instruments with the naming subtest of the widely used Addenbrooke's cognitive examination III (ACEIIINaming) in detecting MildND and MajorND due to AD.

Methods: This cross-sectional, validation study included 99 individuals without neurocognitive disorder, as well as 114 and 49 patients with MildND and MajorND due to AD, respectively. The analyses included categorical principal components analysis using Cramer's V, assessment of the frequency of test items based on corpora of television subtitles, comparison analyses, Kernel Fisher discriminant analysis models, proportional odds logistic regression (POLR) models and stratified repeated random subsampling used to recursive partitioning to training and validation set (70/30 ratio).

Results: WoFi and WoFi-brief, which consists of 16 items, have comparable item frequency and utility and outperform ACEIIINaming. According to the results of the discriminant analysis, the misclassification error was 30.9%, 33.6% and 42.4% for WoFi, WoFi-brief and ACEIIINaming, respectively. In the validation regression model including WoFi the mean misclassification error was 33%, while in those including WoFi-brief and ACEIIINaming it was 31% and 34%, respectively.

Conclusions: WoFi and WoFi-brief are more effective in detecting MildND and MajorND due to AD than ACEIIINaming.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
在一个自然的临床环境中发现阿尔茨海默病的单词检索缺陷(WoFi)测试的验证。
背景:检测命名能力受损有助于检测阿尔茨海默病(AD)引起的轻度(MildND)和重度(MajorND)神经认知障碍。单词检索缺陷测试(WoFi)是一个新的,50个项目,听觉刺激为基础的工具。目的:本研究旨在使wfi适应希腊语,开发一个简短版本的wfi (wfi -brief),比较两种工具的项目频率和用途与广泛使用的Addenbrooke认知检查III (aceiiaming)的命名子测试在检测AD引起的轻度nd和重度nd方面的应用。方法:本横断面验证研究包括99例无神经认知障碍患者,以及114例和49例AD所致轻度nd和重度nd患者。分析方法包括使用Cramer's V进行分类主成分分析、基于电视字幕语料库的测试项目频率评估、比较分析、Kernel Fisher判别分析模型、比例odds logistic回归(POLR)模型和分层重复随机抽样对训练集和验证集进行递归划分(70/30)。结果:wfi和wfi -brief(共16个条目)的条目频率和效用相当,优于aceiiaming。判别分析结果显示,WoFi、wfi -brief和ACEIIINaming的误分类错误率分别为30.9%、33.6%和42.4%。在包含wfi的验证回归模型中,平均误分类错误率为33%,而包含wfi -brief和ACEIIINaming的验证回归模型中,平均误分类错误率分别为31%和34%。结论:wfi和wfi -brief检测AD轻、重度nd比acei检测更有效。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.50
自引率
7.90%
发文量
72
期刊介绍: The European Journal of Ageing: Social, Behavioural and Health Perspectives is an interdisciplinary journal devoted to the understanding of ageing in European societies and the world over. EJA publishes original articles on the social, behavioral and population health aspects of ageing and encourages an integrated approach between these aspects. Emphasis is put on publishing empirical research (including meta-analyses), but conceptual papers (including narrative reviews) and methodological contributions will also be considered. EJA welcomes expert opinions on critical issues in ageing. By stimulating communication between researchers and those using research findings, it aims to contribute to the formulation of better policies and the development of better practice in serving older adults. To further specify, with the term ''social'' is meant the full scope of social science of ageing related research from the micro to the macro level of analysis. With the term ''behavioural'' the full scope of psychological ageing research including life span approaches based on a range of age groups from young to old is envisaged. The term ''population health-related'' denotes social-epidemiological and public health oriented research including research on functional health in the widest possible sense.
期刊最新文献
Determinants of trajectories of informal caregiving in later life: evidence from England. Look on the bright side: the relation between family values, positive aspects of care and caregiver burden. Transitions between care networks: a prospective study among older adults in the Netherlands. Older caregivers' depressive symptomatology over time: evidence from the Survey of Health, Ageing and Retirement in Europe. The role of social network diversity in self-perceptions of aging in later life.
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1