Efficacy of several statistical methods in differentiating TBI and co-occurring conditions: A replication study.

IF 1.7 4区 心理学 Applied Neuropsychology-Adult Pub Date : 2024-09-01 Epub Date: 2022-08-19 DOI:10.1080/23279095.2022.2109028
James V English
{"title":"Efficacy of several statistical methods in differentiating TBI and co-occurring conditions: A replication study.","authors":"James V English","doi":"10.1080/23279095.2022.2109028","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>(1) Cross-validation of neuropsychological test data sets of moderate-severe TBI (<i>N</i> = 30) with test data from moderate-severe (<i>N</i> = 74); somatization (<i>N</i> = 24) and PCS (<i>N</i> = 22) cases in a database, (2) Determine if cognitive test data sets alone differentiated TBI from other groups, and (3) Evaluate the efficacy of measures in comparisons: Kullback-Leibler, Correlation, Patterns, Cohen's <i>d</i>, and MNB.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Meyer's Neuropsychological System; Comparison groups -TBI sample with structural evidence of brain injury (CT/MRI); comparison of 5 statistical measures' efficacy in test data analysis comparing a community sample of moderate TBI (N=30) with a data base containing moderate-severe TBI (<i>N</i> = 74) + co-occurring groups (PCS <i>N</i> = 22) + Somatization (<i>N</i> = 24). Measures utilized: Correlation, Kullbeck-Leibler divergence, Cohen's <i>d</i>, MNB code, Configuration.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Combining the five measures most accurately matched the TBI sample (30/30 cases) with MNB comparison groups of similar TBI severity while differentiating those cases from PCS and Somatoform cognitive testdata. Both Kullback Leibler & Cohens' d reduced false positive errors in comparison with the other measures.</p>","PeriodicalId":50741,"journal":{"name":"Applied Neuropsychology-Adult","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Applied Neuropsychology-Adult","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/23279095.2022.2109028","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2022/8/19 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: (1) Cross-validation of neuropsychological test data sets of moderate-severe TBI (N = 30) with test data from moderate-severe (N = 74); somatization (N = 24) and PCS (N = 22) cases in a database, (2) Determine if cognitive test data sets alone differentiated TBI from other groups, and (3) Evaluate the efficacy of measures in comparisons: Kullback-Leibler, Correlation, Patterns, Cohen's d, and MNB.

Materials and methods: Meyer's Neuropsychological System; Comparison groups -TBI sample with structural evidence of brain injury (CT/MRI); comparison of 5 statistical measures' efficacy in test data analysis comparing a community sample of moderate TBI (N=30) with a data base containing moderate-severe TBI (N = 74) + co-occurring groups (PCS N = 22) + Somatization (N = 24). Measures utilized: Correlation, Kullbeck-Leibler divergence, Cohen's d, MNB code, Configuration.

Results: Combining the five measures most accurately matched the TBI sample (30/30 cases) with MNB comparison groups of similar TBI severity while differentiating those cases from PCS and Somatoform cognitive testdata. Both Kullback Leibler & Cohens' d reduced false positive errors in comparison with the other measures.

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
几种统计方法在区分创伤性脑损伤和并发症方面的功效:重复研究。
目的:(1) 将中度严重创伤性脑损伤(N = 30)的神经心理学测试数据集与数据库中中度严重(N = 74)、躯体化(N = 24)和 PCS(N = 22)病例的测试数据进行交叉验证;(2) 确定认知测试数据集是否能单独区分创伤性脑损伤和其他群体;(3) 评估比较中的测量方法的有效性:Kullback-Leibler、Correlation、Patterns、Cohen's d 和 MNB:迈耶神经心理系统;比较组--有脑损伤结构证据(CT/MRI)的 TBI 样本;比较中度 TBI 社区样本(N=30)与包含中度-重度 TBI(N=74)+ 并发群体(PCS,N=22)+ 躯体化(N=24)的数据库的测试数据分析中 5 种统计测量的有效性。采用的测量方法结果:将这五种测量方法结合起来,可以最准确地将创伤性脑损伤样本(30/30 例)与创伤性脑损伤严重程度相似的 MNB 对比组进行匹配,同时将这些病例与 PCS 和躯体形式认知测试数据区分开来。与其他测量方法相比,Kullback Leibler 和 Cohens' d 都减少了假阳性误差。
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
Applied Neuropsychology-Adult
Applied Neuropsychology-Adult CLINICAL NEUROLOGY-PSYCHOLOGY
自引率
11.80%
发文量
0
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊最新文献
Detecting malingered neurocognitive dysfunction: Comparative analysis of freestanding and embedded performance validity tests ERP biomarkers for go/no-go tasks to detect potential cognitive impairment in community-dwelling older adults Comparison of the GAD-7 and ImPACT symptom cluster scores in measuring anxiety among college athletes. Psychometric validation of the Italian Self-Report Symptoms inventory (SRSI): Factor structure, construct validity, and diagnostic accuracy. Exploring symptomatology and innovative treatment modalities for prefrontal cortex lesions: a systematic 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