日常功能是一组居住在社区、以黑人为主的成年人认知状况的预测指标。

IF 4 Q1 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY Alzheimer''s and Dementia: Diagnosis, Assessment and Disease Monitoring Pub Date : 2024-11-27 eCollection Date: 2024-10-01 DOI:10.1002/dad2.12635
Ashlyn Runk, Meryl A Butters, Andrea L Rosso, Tamara Dubowitz, Wendy M Troxel, Juleen Rodakowski, Tiffany L Gary-Webb, Ann Haas, Bonnie Ghosh-Dastidar, Andrea M Weinstein
{"title":"日常功能是一组居住在社区、以黑人为主的成年人认知状况的预测指标。","authors":"Ashlyn Runk, Meryl A Butters, Andrea L Rosso, Tamara Dubowitz, Wendy M Troxel, Juleen Rodakowski, Tiffany L Gary-Webb, Ann Haas, Bonnie Ghosh-Dastidar, Andrea M Weinstein","doi":"10.1002/dad2.12635","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>We examined whether the Performance Assessment of Self-Care Skills (PASS) and Everyday Cognition Scale-12 (ECog-12) dichotomized cognitive groups in a sample of predominantly Black adults.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Two hundred forty-six community-dwelling adults (95% Black, age 50+) completed cognitive testing, the PASS, and the ECog. Cognitive groups (probable vs unlikely cognitive impairment) were determined by performance on the Modified Mini-Mental State Examination. We examined the predictive validity of the PASS shopping, medication management, and information retrieval subtests and the ECog-12 to dichotomize cognitive groups.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Performance on all PASS subtests (all <i>p</i>'s < .05) differed between cognitive groups, but not ECog-12 (<i>p</i> = 0.17). Only the PASS shopping and medication management had good reliability for determining cognitive group (areas under the curve (AUCs) of .74 each).</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>PASS shopping and medication management exhibited adequate predictive validity when distinguished between cognitive status groups, whereas the PASS information retrieval and ECog-12 did not.</p><p><strong>Highlights: </strong>Mild functional decline is a core diagnostic criterion for cognitive impairment.Performance-based assessments are a valuable tool for assessing functional decline.Most performance-based measures were developed using homogenous samples.Few studies have validated these measures in other racial and ethnic populations.</p>","PeriodicalId":53226,"journal":{"name":"Alzheimer''s and Dementia: Diagnosis, Assessment and Disease Monitoring","volume":"16 4","pages":"e12635"},"PeriodicalIF":4.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11601132/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Everyday functioning as a predictor of cognitive status in a group of community-dwelling, predominantly Black adults.\",\"authors\":\"Ashlyn Runk, Meryl A Butters, Andrea L Rosso, Tamara Dubowitz, Wendy M Troxel, Juleen Rodakowski, Tiffany L Gary-Webb, Ann Haas, Bonnie Ghosh-Dastidar, Andrea M Weinstein\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/dad2.12635\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>We examined whether the Performance Assessment of Self-Care Skills (PASS) and Everyday Cognition Scale-12 (ECog-12) dichotomized cognitive groups in a sample of predominantly Black adults.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Two hundred forty-six community-dwelling adults (95% Black, age 50+) completed cognitive testing, the PASS, and the ECog. Cognitive groups (probable vs unlikely cognitive impairment) were determined by performance on the Modified Mini-Mental State Examination. We examined the predictive validity of the PASS shopping, medication management, and information retrieval subtests and the ECog-12 to dichotomize cognitive groups.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Performance on all PASS subtests (all <i>p</i>'s < .05) differed between cognitive groups, but not ECog-12 (<i>p</i> = 0.17). Only the PASS shopping and medication management had good reliability for determining cognitive group (areas under the curve (AUCs) of .74 each).</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>PASS shopping and medication management exhibited adequate predictive validity when distinguished between cognitive status groups, whereas the PASS information retrieval and ECog-12 did not.</p><p><strong>Highlights: </strong>Mild functional decline is a core diagnostic criterion for cognitive impairment.Performance-based assessments are a valuable tool for assessing functional decline.Most performance-based measures were developed using homogenous samples.Few studies have validated these measures in other racial and ethnic populations.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":53226,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Alzheimer''s and Dementia: Diagnosis, Assessment and Disease Monitoring\",\"volume\":\"16 4\",\"pages\":\"e12635\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11601132/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Alzheimer''s and Dementia: Diagnosis, Assessment and Disease Monitoring\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1002/dad2.12635\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/10/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Alzheimer''s and Dementia: Diagnosis, Assessment and Disease Monitoring","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/dad2.12635","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/10/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

简介:我们研究了自理能力表现评估(PASS)和日常认知量表-12(ECog-12)是否将以黑人为主的成年人样本中的认知群体二分法:246 名居住在社区的成年人(95% 为黑人,年龄在 50 岁以上)完成了认知测试、PASS 和 ECog。认知障碍组别(可能有认知障碍与不可能有认知障碍)是根据 "改良小型精神状态检查"(Mini-Mental State Examination)的成绩确定的。我们研究了 PASS 购物、药物管理和信息检索子测试以及 ECog-12 的预测有效性,以二分认知障碍组别:所有 PASS 次测试的成绩(所有 p 的 p = 0.17)。只有 PASS 购物和药物管理在确定认知组别方面具有良好的可靠性(曲线下面积(AUC)均为 0.74):讨论:PASS购物和药物管理在区分认知状况组别时表现出足够的预测有效性,而PASS信息检索和ECog-12则没有:基于表现的评估是评估功能衰退的重要工具。大多数基于表现的测量方法都是在同质样本中开发的,很少有研究在其他种族和民族人群中验证这些测量方法。
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
Everyday functioning as a predictor of cognitive status in a group of community-dwelling, predominantly Black adults.

Introduction: We examined whether the Performance Assessment of Self-Care Skills (PASS) and Everyday Cognition Scale-12 (ECog-12) dichotomized cognitive groups in a sample of predominantly Black adults.

Methods: Two hundred forty-six community-dwelling adults (95% Black, age 50+) completed cognitive testing, the PASS, and the ECog. Cognitive groups (probable vs unlikely cognitive impairment) were determined by performance on the Modified Mini-Mental State Examination. We examined the predictive validity of the PASS shopping, medication management, and information retrieval subtests and the ECog-12 to dichotomize cognitive groups.

Results: Performance on all PASS subtests (all p's < .05) differed between cognitive groups, but not ECog-12 (p = 0.17). Only the PASS shopping and medication management had good reliability for determining cognitive group (areas under the curve (AUCs) of .74 each).

Discussion: PASS shopping and medication management exhibited adequate predictive validity when distinguished between cognitive status groups, whereas the PASS information retrieval and ECog-12 did not.

Highlights: Mild functional decline is a core diagnostic criterion for cognitive impairment.Performance-based assessments are a valuable tool for assessing functional decline.Most performance-based measures were developed using homogenous samples.Few studies have validated these measures in other racial and ethnic populations.

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
CiteScore
7.80
自引率
7.50%
发文量
101
审稿时长
8 weeks
期刊介绍: Alzheimer''s & Dementia: Diagnosis, Assessment & Disease Monitoring (DADM) is an open access, peer-reviewed, journal from the Alzheimer''s Association® that will publish new research that reports the discovery, development and validation of instruments, technologies, algorithms, and innovative processes. Papers will cover a range of topics interested in the early and accurate detection of individuals with memory complaints and/or among asymptomatic individuals at elevated risk for various forms of memory disorders. The expectation for published papers will be to translate fundamental knowledge about the neurobiology of the disease into practical reports that describe both the conceptual and methodological aspects of the submitted scientific inquiry. Published topics will explore the development of biomarkers, surrogate markers, and conceptual/methodological challenges. Publication priority will be given to papers that 1) describe putative surrogate markers that accurately track disease progression, 2) biomarkers that fulfill international regulatory requirements, 3) reports from large, well-characterized population-based cohorts that comprise the heterogeneity and diversity of asymptomatic individuals and 4) algorithmic development that considers multi-marker arrays (e.g., integrated-omics, genetics, biofluids, imaging, etc.) and advanced computational analytics and technologies.
期刊最新文献
Everyday functioning as a predictor of cognitive status in a group of community-dwelling, predominantly Black adults. Elevated tau in the piriform cortex in Alzheimer's but not Parkinson's disease using PET-MR. A data-driven, multi-domain brain gray matter signature as a powerful biomarker associated with several clinical outcomes. Association of a pace of aging epigenetic clock with rate of cognitive decline in the Framingham Heart Study Offspring Cohort. Association of circulating ketone bodies with cognitive performance and dementia in the Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis (MESA).
×
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