小儿发作性睡病症状测量工具的比较

Philippe Lehert , Giuseppe Plazzi
{"title":"小儿发作性睡病症状测量工具的比较","authors":"Philippe Lehert ,&nbsp;Giuseppe Plazzi","doi":"10.1016/j.sleepe.2022.100032","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Narcolepsy is a rare disabling neurological disease, affecting children and adults. The most recent development of measurement tools for narcolepsy were developed for adults; only a few tools are available for children without comparison on their validity. This research aims at comparing the validity of existing measurement tools in paediatric narcolepsy. From an ongoing randomized controlled trial, we extracted the data blind to the treatment of the 93 first terminating patients on which we compared the Paediatric Daytime Sleepiness Scale (PDSS), the Ullanlina Narcolepsy scale (UNS), the Child and Adolescent Sleepiness Questionnaire (CASS), the maintenance of wakefulness test (MWT), and the cataplexy episodes count (CEC).</p><p>The comparison was carried out on reliability, internal consistency, sensitivity to change, minimum important difference, construct validity and concurrent validity.</p><p>We provide evidence that the Ullanlina UNS score, currently used for screening purposes, constitutes a reliable and sensitive overall symptom measurement tool. Its subscore (UNS-CTP) based on the first four items permits a sensitive measurement of cataplexy, whereas the UNS-EDS subscore was found inferior to the PDSS scale. Compared with the objective measurement of symptoms (MWT, CEC), these scales better correlated with the clinical global impression of change in time, they are characterized by higher sensitivity, and they are much easier to use.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":74809,"journal":{"name":"Sleep epidemiology","volume":"2 ","pages":"Article 100032"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2667343622000130/pdfft?md5=df166a925c10ccbbc3877f095d459f4e&pid=1-s2.0-S2667343622000130-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparing symptom measurement tools in pediatric narcolepsy\",\"authors\":\"Philippe Lehert ,&nbsp;Giuseppe Plazzi\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.sleepe.2022.100032\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>Narcolepsy is a rare disabling neurological disease, affecting children and adults. The most recent development of measurement tools for narcolepsy were developed for adults; only a few tools are available for children without comparison on their validity. This research aims at comparing the validity of existing measurement tools in paediatric narcolepsy. From an ongoing randomized controlled trial, we extracted the data blind to the treatment of the 93 first terminating patients on which we compared the Paediatric Daytime Sleepiness Scale (PDSS), the Ullanlina Narcolepsy scale (UNS), the Child and Adolescent Sleepiness Questionnaire (CASS), the maintenance of wakefulness test (MWT), and the cataplexy episodes count (CEC).</p><p>The comparison was carried out on reliability, internal consistency, sensitivity to change, minimum important difference, construct validity and concurrent validity.</p><p>We provide evidence that the Ullanlina UNS score, currently used for screening purposes, constitutes a reliable and sensitive overall symptom measurement tool. Its subscore (UNS-CTP) based on the first four items permits a sensitive measurement of cataplexy, whereas the UNS-EDS subscore was found inferior to the PDSS scale. Compared with the objective measurement of symptoms (MWT, CEC), these scales better correlated with the clinical global impression of change in time, they are characterized by higher sensitivity, and they are much easier to use.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":74809,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Sleep epidemiology\",\"volume\":\"2 \",\"pages\":\"Article 100032\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2667343622000130/pdfft?md5=df166a925c10ccbbc3877f095d459f4e&pid=1-s2.0-S2667343622000130-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Sleep epidemiology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2667343622000130\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Sleep epidemiology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2667343622000130","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

嗜睡症是一种罕见的致残神经系统疾病,影响儿童和成人。最近发展的发作性睡病测量工具是为成人开发的;只有少数工具可供儿童使用,没有对其有效性进行比较。本研究旨在比较现有测量工具在儿童发作性睡病中的有效性。从一项正在进行的随机对照试验中,我们提取了93例首次终止患者的治疗数据,我们比较了儿童日间嗜睡量表(PDSS)、Ullanlina发作性睡量表(UNS)、儿童和青少年嗜睡问卷(CASS)、保持清醒测试(MWT)和猝睡发作次数(CEC)。在信度、内部一致性、变化敏感性、最小重要差异、结构效度和并发效度等方面进行了比较。我们提供的证据表明,Ullanlina UNS评分,目前用于筛选目的,构成了一个可靠和敏感的整体症状测量工具。其基于前四个项目的分值(UNS-CTP)可以灵敏地测量中风,而UNS-EDS分值被发现不如PDSS量表。与客观测量症状(MWT、CEC)相比,这些量表与临床总体印象随时间变化的相关性更好,具有更高的灵敏度和更易于使用的特点。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Comparing symptom measurement tools in pediatric narcolepsy

Narcolepsy is a rare disabling neurological disease, affecting children and adults. The most recent development of measurement tools for narcolepsy were developed for adults; only a few tools are available for children without comparison on their validity. This research aims at comparing the validity of existing measurement tools in paediatric narcolepsy. From an ongoing randomized controlled trial, we extracted the data blind to the treatment of the 93 first terminating patients on which we compared the Paediatric Daytime Sleepiness Scale (PDSS), the Ullanlina Narcolepsy scale (UNS), the Child and Adolescent Sleepiness Questionnaire (CASS), the maintenance of wakefulness test (MWT), and the cataplexy episodes count (CEC).

The comparison was carried out on reliability, internal consistency, sensitivity to change, minimum important difference, construct validity and concurrent validity.

We provide evidence that the Ullanlina UNS score, currently used for screening purposes, constitutes a reliable and sensitive overall symptom measurement tool. Its subscore (UNS-CTP) based on the first four items permits a sensitive measurement of cataplexy, whereas the UNS-EDS subscore was found inferior to the PDSS scale. Compared with the objective measurement of symptoms (MWT, CEC), these scales better correlated with the clinical global impression of change in time, they are characterized by higher sensitivity, and they are much easier to use.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Sleep epidemiology
Sleep epidemiology Dentistry, Oral Surgery and Medicine, Clinical Neurology, Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine
CiteScore
1.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Sleep disparities in the United States: Comparison of logistic and linear regression with stratification by race Heart rate variability, sleep quality and physical activity in medical students Prevalence of sleep disturbances and factors associated among school going children in Uganda, a cross-sectional study Longitudinal study of chronic nausea and vomiting and its associations with sleep-related leg cramps in the US general population Erratum to “Modeling and Feature Assessment of the Sleep Quality among Chronic Kidney Disease Patients” [Sleep Epidemiology Volume 2, December 2022, 100041]
×
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