Validity and reliability of the Turkish version of the ALBA screening instrument for Lewy body dementia in older adults.

IF 1.7 4区 心理学 Applied Neuropsychology-Adult Pub Date : 2024-11-01 Epub Date: 2022-11-04 DOI:10.1080/23279095.2022.2142793
Derya Kaya, Besra Hazal Yesil Gurel, Burcu Akpinar Soylemez, Fatma Sena Dost, Ozge Dokuzlar, Feyza Mutlay, Esra Ates Bulut, Kadriye Petek, Angel Bernardo Golimstok, Ahmet Turan Isik
{"title":"Validity and reliability of the Turkish version of the ALBA screening instrument for Lewy body dementia in older adults.","authors":"Derya Kaya, Besra Hazal Yesil Gurel, Burcu Akpinar Soylemez, Fatma Sena Dost, Ozge Dokuzlar, Feyza Mutlay, Esra Ates Bulut, Kadriye Petek, Angel Bernardo Golimstok, Ahmet Turan Isik","doi":"10.1080/23279095.2022.2142793","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>ALBA screening instrument (ASI) has been demonstrated to be an effective, cheap, and noninvasive clinical instrument to screen for Lewy body dementia (LBD). We aimed to determine the validity and reliability of the Turkish version of ASI (ASI-T) in patients with LBD and to investigate the discriminative power of the test in patients with Alzheimer's Disease (AD), LBD, and cognitively healthy older adults (controls). 172 older adults over 60 years of age (43 with LBD, 41 AD, and 88 controls) were included. The sensitivity and specificity of the instrument were determined. A significant difference was found in ASI-T total score between people with LBD versus the controls (t=-9.259; <i>p</i> < 0.001), and versus patients with AD (<i>t</i> = 3.490; <i>p</i> = 0.001). Internal consistency of the ASI-T was good(Cronbach's alpha = 0.81). The cutoff score of 7 showed sensitivity (86%) and specificity (81%) (AUC= 0.888,CI0.95, <i>p</i> < 0.001) compared to controls. Also, compared to AD, it showed sensitivity (86%) and specificity(70%) (AUC = 0.590,CI .95, <i>p</i> < 0.001). Moreover, ASI-T demonstrated a significant concurrent validity with MMSE (<i>r</i> = -0.62; <i>p</i> < 0.001) and MoCA (<i>r</i> = -0.54; <i>p</i> = 0.003). In factor analysis, the five subscales accounted for 60% of the total variance. Our findings suggested that the ASI-T is a reliable, valid, and effective instrument for screening LBD. With acceptable psychometric properties, it has the power to distinguish patients with LBD from controls or those with AD.</p>","PeriodicalId":50741,"journal":{"name":"Applied Neuropsychology-Adult","volume":" ","pages":"1457-1462"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-01","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/10.1080/23279095.2022.2142793","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2022/11/4 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

ALBA screening instrument (ASI) has been demonstrated to be an effective, cheap, and noninvasive clinical instrument to screen for Lewy body dementia (LBD). We aimed to determine the validity and reliability of the Turkish version of ASI (ASI-T) in patients with LBD and to investigate the discriminative power of the test in patients with Alzheimer's Disease (AD), LBD, and cognitively healthy older adults (controls). 172 older adults over 60 years of age (43 with LBD, 41 AD, and 88 controls) were included. The sensitivity and specificity of the instrument were determined. A significant difference was found in ASI-T total score between people with LBD versus the controls (t=-9.259; p < 0.001), and versus patients with AD (t = 3.490; p = 0.001). Internal consistency of the ASI-T was good(Cronbach's alpha = 0.81). The cutoff score of 7 showed sensitivity (86%) and specificity (81%) (AUC= 0.888,CI0.95, p < 0.001) compared to controls. Also, compared to AD, it showed sensitivity (86%) and specificity(70%) (AUC = 0.590,CI .95, p < 0.001). Moreover, ASI-T demonstrated a significant concurrent validity with MMSE (r = -0.62; p < 0.001) and MoCA (r = -0.54; p = 0.003). In factor analysis, the five subscales accounted for 60% of the total variance. Our findings suggested that the ASI-T is a reliable, valid, and effective instrument for screening LBD. With acceptable psychometric properties, it has the power to distinguish patients with LBD from controls or those with AD.

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
土耳其版路易体痴呆症 ALBA 筛查工具的有效性和可靠性。
ALBA 筛查工具(ASI)已被证明是筛查路易体痴呆(LBD)的一种有效、廉价和无创的临床工具。我们旨在确定土耳其版 ASI(ASI-T)在路易体痴呆患者中的有效性和可靠性,并研究该测试在阿尔茨海默病(AD)患者、路易体痴呆患者和认知健康的老年人(对照组)中的鉴别力。研究对象包括 172 名 60 岁以上的老年人(43 名阿尔茨海默病患者、41 名阿尔茨海默病患者和 88 名对照组)。对该工具的灵敏度和特异性进行了测定。发现枸杞多糖症患者与对照组的 ASI-T 总分有明显差异(t=-9.259;p t = 3.490;p = 0.001)。ASI-T 的内部一致性良好(Cronbach's alpha = 0.81)。7 分的临界值显示了灵敏度(86%)和特异性(81%)(AUC= 0.888,CI0.95,p p r = -0.62; p r = -0.54; p = 0.003)。在因子分析中,五个分量表占总方差的 60%。我们的研究结果表明,ASI-T 是一种可靠、有效且有效的枸杞多糖症筛查工具。它具有可接受的心理测量特性,能够将枸杞多糖患者与对照组或注意力缺失症患者区分开来。
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
Perspective taking deficits and their relationship with theory of mind abilities in patients with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS). Outcomes and predictors of stress among Turkish family caregivers of patients with acquired brain injury. The Moroccan MoCA test: Translation, cultural adaptation, and validation. Impact of cognition on test-retest reliability and concurrent validity of n-back for Chinese stroke patients. Ecological validity of executive function tests in predicting driving performance.
×
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