简易版日常认知量表 (ECog-12) 在检测认知障碍方面的表现

M. Manjavong, A. Diaz, M. T. Ashford, A. Aaronson, M. J. Miller, J. M. Kang, S. Mackin, R. Tank, B. Landavazo, D. Truran, S. T. Farias, M. Weiner, Rachel L. Nosheny
{"title":"简易版日常认知量表 (ECog-12) 在检测认知障碍方面的表现","authors":"M. Manjavong, A. Diaz, M. T. Ashford, A. Aaronson, M. J. Miller, J. M. Kang, S. Mackin, R. Tank, B. Landavazo, D. Truran, S. T. Farias, M. Weiner, Rachel L. Nosheny","doi":"10.14283/jpad.2024.109","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<h3 data-test=\"abstract-sub-heading\">Background</h3><p>The Everyday Cognition (ECog) 12-item scale, a functional decline measurement, can distinguish dementia from cognitively unimpaired (CU). Limited data compare ECog-12 performance by raters (self vs. informant) and scoring systems (average numeric vs. categorical grouping) to differentiate cognitive statuses.</p><h3 data-test=\"abstract-sub-heading\">Objectives</h3><p>To evaluate the performance of ECog-12 in differentiation cognitive statuses.</p><h3 data-test=\"abstract-sub-heading\">Design</h3><p>A cross-sectional diagnostic test study.</p><h3 data-test=\"abstract-sub-heading\">Setting and Participants</h3><p>Data from the Alzheimer’s Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (ADNI) study are analyzed. Participants were aged 55–90 years old divided into subgroups based on diagnostic criteria.</p><h3 data-test=\"abstract-sub-heading\">Measurements</h3><p>We evaluated ECog-12 performance across different diagnostic groups, such as CU vs cognitive impairment (CI; mild cognitive impairment (MCI), and dementia), and the association between ECog-12 and CI. This procedure was repeated for self- and partner (informant)-reports. Additionally, types of ECog scores were also assessed, where an average ECog score was calculated (continuous numeric) as well as a categorical grouping (“any occasional declined” or “any consistently declined”) based on item-level responses to ECog questions.</p><h3 data-test=\"abstract-sub-heading\">Results</h3><p>ECog-12 cut-off scores of 1.36 (self-reported) and 1.45 (partner-reported) distinguish CU from CI with AUC 0.7 and 0.78, respectively. Adding a memory-concern question improved self-reported-ECog AUC to 0.79. Self- and partner-reported “consistently-declined” ECog-12 categorical grouping provided AUC 0.69 and 0.78. The study partner reported ECog-12 showed a greater association with CI than self-reported, with odds ratios of 35.45 and 8.79, respectively.</p><h3 data-test=\"abstract-sub-heading\">Conclusion</h3><p>Study partner-reported ECog scores performed better than self-reported ECog-12 in differentiating cognitive statuses, and a higher study partner reported ECog score was a higher prognostic risk for CI. A memory concern question could enhance self-reported ECog-12 performance. This further emphasizes the need to obtain data from study partners for research and clinical practice.</p>","PeriodicalId":22711,"journal":{"name":"The Journal of Prevention of Alzheimer's Disease","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Performance of a Short Version of the Everyday Cognition Scale (ECog-12) to Detect Cognitive Impairment\",\"authors\":\"M. Manjavong, A. Diaz, M. T. Ashford, A. Aaronson, M. J. Miller, J. M. Kang, S. Mackin, R. Tank, B. Landavazo, D. Truran, S. T. Farias, M. Weiner, Rachel L. Nosheny\",\"doi\":\"10.14283/jpad.2024.109\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<h3 data-test=\\\"abstract-sub-heading\\\">Background</h3><p>The Everyday Cognition (ECog) 12-item scale, a functional decline measurement, can distinguish dementia from cognitively unimpaired (CU). Limited data compare ECog-12 performance by raters (self vs. informant) and scoring systems (average numeric vs. categorical grouping) to differentiate cognitive statuses.</p><h3 data-test=\\\"abstract-sub-heading\\\">Objectives</h3><p>To evaluate the performance of ECog-12 in differentiation cognitive statuses.</p><h3 data-test=\\\"abstract-sub-heading\\\">Design</h3><p>A cross-sectional diagnostic test study.</p><h3 data-test=\\\"abstract-sub-heading\\\">Setting and Participants</h3><p>Data from the Alzheimer’s Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (ADNI) study are analyzed. Participants were aged 55–90 years old divided into subgroups based on diagnostic criteria.</p><h3 data-test=\\\"abstract-sub-heading\\\">Measurements</h3><p>We evaluated ECog-12 performance across different diagnostic groups, such as CU vs cognitive impairment (CI; mild cognitive impairment (MCI), and dementia), and the association between ECog-12 and CI. This procedure was repeated for self- and partner (informant)-reports. Additionally, types of ECog scores were also assessed, where an average ECog score was calculated (continuous numeric) as well as a categorical grouping (“any occasional declined” or “any consistently declined”) based on item-level responses to ECog questions.</p><h3 data-test=\\\"abstract-sub-heading\\\">Results</h3><p>ECog-12 cut-off scores of 1.36 (self-reported) and 1.45 (partner-reported) distinguish CU from CI with AUC 0.7 and 0.78, respectively. Adding a memory-concern question improved self-reported-ECog AUC to 0.79. Self- and partner-reported “consistently-declined” ECog-12 categorical grouping provided AUC 0.69 and 0.78. The study partner reported ECog-12 showed a greater association with CI than self-reported, with odds ratios of 35.45 and 8.79, respectively.</p><h3 data-test=\\\"abstract-sub-heading\\\">Conclusion</h3><p>Study partner-reported ECog scores performed better than self-reported ECog-12 in differentiating cognitive statuses, and a higher study partner reported ECog score was a higher prognostic risk for CI. A memory concern question could enhance self-reported ECog-12 performance. This further emphasizes the need to obtain data from study partners for research and clinical practice.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":22711,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"The Journal of Prevention of Alzheimer's Disease\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-06-21\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"The Journal of Prevention of Alzheimer's Disease\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.14283/jpad.2024.109\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"BUSINESS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Journal of Prevention of Alzheimer's Disease","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.14283/jpad.2024.109","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"BUSINESS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景日常认知(ECog)12项量表是一种功能衰退测量方法,可将痴呆症与认知功能未受损者(CU)区分开来。有限的数据比较了ECog-12在区分认知状态方面的评分者(自我评分与信息提供者评分)和评分系统(平均数字分组与分类分组)的表现。目的 评估ECog-12在区分认知状态方面的表现。测量我们评估了ECog-12在不同诊断组中的表现,如CU与认知障碍(CI;轻度认知障碍(MCI)和痴呆),以及ECog-12与CI之间的关联。这一过程在自我报告和伴侣(线人)报告中重复进行。此外,还评估了ECog得分的类型,根据对ECog问题的条目级回答,计算出ECog平均得分(连续数字)和分类分组("任何偶尔下降 "或 "任何持续下降")。结果ECog-12的临界值为1.36(自我报告)和1.45(伴侣报告),AUC分别为0.7和0.78,可将CU与CI区分开来。增加一个记忆相关问题后,自我报告-ECog 的 AUC 提高到了 0.79。自我和研究伙伴报告的 "持续下降 "ECog-12分类分组的AUC分别为0.69和0.78。在区分认知状态方面,研究对象报告的 ECog 评分比自我报告的 ECog 评分更好,研究对象报告的 ECog 评分越高,CI 的预后风险越高。记忆问题可提高自我报告的ECog-12成绩。这进一步强调了在研究和临床实践中从研究伙伴处获取数据的必要性。
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
Performance of a Short Version of the Everyday Cognition Scale (ECog-12) to Detect Cognitive Impairment

Background

The Everyday Cognition (ECog) 12-item scale, a functional decline measurement, can distinguish dementia from cognitively unimpaired (CU). Limited data compare ECog-12 performance by raters (self vs. informant) and scoring systems (average numeric vs. categorical grouping) to differentiate cognitive statuses.

Objectives

To evaluate the performance of ECog-12 in differentiation cognitive statuses.

Design

A cross-sectional diagnostic test study.

Setting and Participants

Data from the Alzheimer’s Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (ADNI) study are analyzed. Participants were aged 55–90 years old divided into subgroups based on diagnostic criteria.

Measurements

We evaluated ECog-12 performance across different diagnostic groups, such as CU vs cognitive impairment (CI; mild cognitive impairment (MCI), and dementia), and the association between ECog-12 and CI. This procedure was repeated for self- and partner (informant)-reports. Additionally, types of ECog scores were also assessed, where an average ECog score was calculated (continuous numeric) as well as a categorical grouping (“any occasional declined” or “any consistently declined”) based on item-level responses to ECog questions.

Results

ECog-12 cut-off scores of 1.36 (self-reported) and 1.45 (partner-reported) distinguish CU from CI with AUC 0.7 and 0.78, respectively. Adding a memory-concern question improved self-reported-ECog AUC to 0.79. Self- and partner-reported “consistently-declined” ECog-12 categorical grouping provided AUC 0.69 and 0.78. The study partner reported ECog-12 showed a greater association with CI than self-reported, with odds ratios of 35.45 and 8.79, respectively.

Conclusion

Study partner-reported ECog scores performed better than self-reported ECog-12 in differentiating cognitive statuses, and a higher study partner reported ECog score was a higher prognostic risk for CI. A memory concern question could enhance self-reported ECog-12 performance. This further emphasizes the need to obtain data from study partners for research and clinical practice.

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
The Journal of Prevention of Alzheimer's Disease
The Journal of Prevention of Alzheimer's Disease Medicine-Psychiatry and Mental Health
CiteScore
9.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: The JPAD Journal of Prevention of Alzheimer’Disease will publish reviews, original research articles and short reports to improve our knowledge in the field of Alzheimer prevention including: neurosciences, biomarkers, imaging, epidemiology, public health, physical cognitive exercise, nutrition, risk and protective factors, drug development, trials design, and heath economic outcomes.JPAD will publish also the meeting abstracts from Clinical Trial on Alzheimer Disease (CTAD) and will be distributed both in paper and online version worldwide.We hope that JPAD with your contribution will play a role in the development of Alzheimer prevention.
期刊最新文献
Association between Cognitive Reserve Indicator and Chronic Disease-Free Survival: A Large Community-Based Longitudinal Study Phase 1 Studies of the Anti-Tau Monoclonal Antibody JNJ-63733657 in Healthy Participants and Participants with Alzheimer’s Disease Roles of TREM2 in the Pathological Mechanism and the Therapeutic Strategies of Alzheimer’s Disease Development and Validation the Mobile Toolbox (MTB) Spelling Test Correlates of Subjective Cognitive Decline in Black American Men
×
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