Reliability of Medical History Reporting in Older Adults With and Without Cognitive Impairment.

IF 2.6 Q2 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY Journal of Central Nervous System Disease Pub Date : 2019-04-22 eCollection Date: 2019-01-01 DOI:10.1177/1179573519843874

Nicholas Curcio, Kristin Wilmoth, Christian LoBue, C Munro Cullum

{"title":"Reliability of Medical History Reporting in Older Adults With and Without Cognitive Impairment.","authors":"Nicholas Curcio, Kristin Wilmoth, Christian LoBue, C Munro Cullum","doi":"10.1177/1179573519843874","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Clinical diagnosis of cognitive disorders depends on accurate reporting of medical history, yet little is known about the reliability and the validity of such reports, particularly in older patients with and without cognitive impairment.Methods: In 2 studies, we examined the reliability and the validity of reported histories of select medical events in adults with and without cognitive impairment from a large national cohort.Results: Information from subjects (N1 = 3664), obtained from 2 time points, 6 to 12 months apart, was consistent across most medical events, regardless of the diagnostic group (range = 97.6%-100% agreement; Cohen κ range = 0.712-0.945), with few exceptions. Validity analyses (N2 = 382) revealed that 3 of 5 medical events assessed showed substantial agreement between self-report information and clinician diagnosis.Conclusions: These data represent some of the first to demonstrate the reliability and the validity of reported select medical events in older adults with and without cognitive impairment.","PeriodicalId":15218,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Central Nervous System Disease","volume":"11 ","pages":"1179573519843874"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2019-04-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/eb/79/10.1177_1179573519843874.PMC6477758.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Central Nervous System Disease","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1179573519843874","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2019/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Clinical diagnosis of cognitive disorders depends on accurate reporting of medical history, yet little is known about the reliability and the validity of such reports, particularly in older patients with and without cognitive impairment.

Methods: In 2 studies, we examined the reliability and the validity of reported histories of select medical events in adults with and without cognitive impairment from a large national cohort.

Results: Information from subjects (N₁ = 3664), obtained from 2 time points, 6 to 12 months apart, was consistent across most medical events, regardless of the diagnostic group (range = 97.6%-100% agreement; Cohen κ range = 0.712-0.945), with few exceptions. Validity analyses (N₂ = 382) revealed that 3 of 5 medical events assessed showed substantial agreement between self-report information and clinician diagnosis.

Conclusions: These data represent some of the first to demonstrate the reliability and the validity of reported select medical events in older adults with and without cognitive impairment.

Abstract Image

查看原文

微信好友朋友圈 QQ好友复制链接

本刊更多论文

有认知障碍和无认知障碍老年人病史报告的可靠性。

背景：认知障碍的临床诊断取决于病史报告的准确性：认知障碍的临床诊断取决于病史报告的准确性，但人们对病史报告的可靠性和有效性知之甚少，尤其是在有认知障碍和无认知障碍的老年患者中：在两项研究中，我们从一个大型全国性队列中考察了有认知障碍和无认知障碍的成年人所报告的特定医疗事件病史的可靠性和有效性：受试者（N1 = 3664）从相隔 6 至 12 个月的 2 个时间点获得的信息在大多数医疗事件中都是一致的，与诊断组无关（一致性范围 = 97.6%-100%；Cohen κ 范围 = 0.712-0.945），只有少数例外。有效性分析（N2 = 382）显示，在评估的 5 个医疗事件中，有 3 个事件的自我报告信息与临床医生的诊断结果基本一致：这些数据首次证明了有认知障碍和无认知障碍的老年人所报告的特定医疗事件的可靠性和有效性。

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