TMA-93 for Diagnosing Amnestic Mild Cognitive Impairment: A Comparison With the Free and Cued Selective Reminding Test.

IF 2.7 4区 医学 Q2 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY American Journal of Alzheimers Disease and Other Dementias Pub Date : 2019-08-01 Epub Date: 2019-05-13 DOI:10.1177/1533317519848230
Silvia Rodrigo-Herrero, Cristóbal Carnero-Pardo, Carlota Méndez-Barrio, Miguel De Miguel-Tristancho, Eugenia Graciani-Cantisán, María Bernal Sánchez-Arjona, Didier Maillet, María Dolores Jiménez-Hernández, Emilio Franco-Macías
{"title":"TMA-93 for Diagnosing Amnestic Mild Cognitive Impairment: A Comparison With the Free and Cued Selective Reminding Test.","authors":"Silvia Rodrigo-Herrero, Cristóbal Carnero-Pardo, Carlota Méndez-Barrio, Miguel De Miguel-Tristancho, Eugenia Graciani-Cantisán, María Bernal Sánchez-Arjona, Didier Maillet, María Dolores Jiménez-Hernández, Emilio Franco-Macías","doi":"10.1177/1533317519848230","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>TMA-93 examines binding by images, an advantage for the less educated individuals.</p><p><strong>Aim: </strong>To compare the discriminative validity of TMA-93 against the picture version of Free and Cued Selective Reminding Test (FCSRT) to distinguish patients with amnestic mild cognitive impairment (aMCI) from normal controls (NCs) without excluding less educated individuals.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong></p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Phase I diagnostic evaluation study.</p><p><strong>Participants: </strong>A total of 30 patients with aMCI and 30 NCs matched for sociodemographics variables.</p><p><strong>Statistical analysis: </strong>The diagnostic accuracy for each test was calculated by conducting receiver operating characteristic curve analysis. Hanley and McNeil method was used to compare diagnostic accuracy of different tests on the same sample.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Up to 41.7% of the sample had less than a first grade of education. Both tests showed excellent diagnostic accuracy. The comparisons did not show significant differences.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>TMA-93 is so accurate as FCSRT to differentiate aMCI from controls including less educated individuals. The test could be considered as a choice in this sociodemographic context.</p>","PeriodicalId":50816,"journal":{"name":"American Journal of Alzheimers Disease and Other Dementias","volume":"34 5","pages":"322-328"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2019-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10852447/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American Journal of Alzheimers Disease and Other Dementias","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1533317519848230","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2019/5/13 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: TMA-93 examines binding by images, an advantage for the less educated individuals.

Aim: To compare the discriminative validity of TMA-93 against the picture version of Free and Cued Selective Reminding Test (FCSRT) to distinguish patients with amnestic mild cognitive impairment (aMCI) from normal controls (NCs) without excluding less educated individuals.

Methods:

Design: Phase I diagnostic evaluation study.

Participants: A total of 30 patients with aMCI and 30 NCs matched for sociodemographics variables.

Statistical analysis: The diagnostic accuracy for each test was calculated by conducting receiver operating characteristic curve analysis. Hanley and McNeil method was used to compare diagnostic accuracy of different tests on the same sample.

Results: Up to 41.7% of the sample had less than a first grade of education. Both tests showed excellent diagnostic accuracy. The comparisons did not show significant differences.

Conclusions: TMA-93 is so accurate as FCSRT to differentiate aMCI from controls including less educated individuals. The test could be considered as a choice in this sociodemographic context.

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
用于诊断失忆性轻度认知障碍的 TMA-93:与自由选择性记忆测试和诱导选择性记忆测试的比较。
背景:目的:比较 TMA-93 与图片版自由和诱导选择性记忆测试(FCSRT)的鉴别有效性,以区分失忆性轻度认知障碍(aMCI)患者和正常对照组(NCs),同时不排除教育程度较低者:设计:I期诊断评估研究:方法: 设计:I期诊断评估研究:统计分析:统计分析:通过接收者操作特征曲线分析计算每项测试的诊断准确性。汉利和麦克尼尔法用于比较不同检测方法对同一样本的诊断准确性:结果:41.7%的样本受教育程度低于一年级。两种测试都显示出极佳的诊断准确性。比较结果未显示显著差异:结论:TMA-93 与 FCSRT 在区分 aMCI 与对照组(包括受教育程度较低者)方面具有同样的准确性。在这种社会人口背景下,该测试可作为一种选择。
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
American Journal of Alzheimers Disease and Other Dementias
American Journal of Alzheimers Disease and Other Dementias GERIATRICS & GERONTOLOGY-CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
CiteScore
5.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
30
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: American Journal of Alzheimer''s Disease and other Dementias® (AJADD) is for professionals on the frontlines of Alzheimer''s care, dementia, and clinical depression--especially physicians, nurses, psychiatrists, administrators, and other healthcare specialists who manage patients with dementias and their families. This journal is a member of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).
期刊最新文献
The Psychological Symptoms and Their Relationship to the Quality of Life Among Dementia Patients Caregivers Different Splice Isoforms of Peripheral Triggering Receptor Expressed on Myeloid Cells 2 mRNA Expressions are Associated With Cognitive Decline in Mild Dementia Due to Alzheimer’s Disease and Reflect Central Neuroinflammation White Light Stimulation at Gamma Frequency to Modify the Aβ42 and tau Proteins in SH-SY5Y Cells Burden of Illness Among Patients with Psychosis due to Dementia with Lewy Bodies and Other Dementias. Task-Evoked Pupillary Response as a Potential Biomarker of Dementia and Mild Cognitive Impairment: A Scoping Review.
×
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