认知对中国脑卒中患者 n-back 测试重复可靠性和并发有效性的影响。

IF 1.7 4区 心理学 Applied Neuropsychology-Adult Pub Date : 2024-11-01 Epub Date: 2022-09-24 DOI:10.1080/23279095.2022.2121211
Xiuzhen Liu, Fang Li, Weiqun Song
{"title":"认知对中国脑卒中患者 n-back 测试重复可靠性和并发有效性的影响。","authors":"Xiuzhen Liu, Fang Li, Weiqun Song","doi":"10.1080/23279095.2022.2121211","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>The objective of this study was the measurement of the test-retest reliability of n-back in Chinese stroke patients.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Seventy-five sub-acute stroke patients performed n-back twice in three days. The test-retest reliability of n-back was analyzed by correlation coefficient.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The n-back had excellent test-retest reliability in stroke patients. Pearson or Spearman coefficients ranged from 0.81 to 0.88. The intra-class correlation coefficients ranged from 0.72 to 0.87. The Chinese version of Montreal Cognitive Assessment-Basic (MoCA-BC) score was significantly correlated with the performance of n-back. MoCA-BC and n-back accuracy were significantly related in the Mild Cognitive Impairment (MCI) group (<i>r</i> = 0.60 in 1-back, <i>p</i> = .002; <i>r</i> = 0.43 in 2-back, <i>p</i> = .040). However, MoCA-BC was correlated with reaction time (RT) in the Cognitively Normal (CN) group (<i>r</i> = -0.44 in 1-back, <i>p</i> = .003; <i>r</i> = -0.36 in 2-back, <i>p</i> = .018). The test-retest reliability of CN group was mostly higher than that of MCI group RT: 0.71-0.76 in MCI, 0.80-0.88 in CN; accuracy: 0.80-0.85 in MCI, 0.75-0.86 in CN). The practice effect was observed in the CN group instead of the MCI group.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This study indicated that the test-retest reliability of n-back was high in stroke patients. N-back was correlated with cognition. It was preferable to conduct subgroup analyses according to the level of cognitive assessment of patients with stroke.</p>","PeriodicalId":50741,"journal":{"name":"Applied Neuropsychology-Adult","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Impact of cognition on test-retest reliability and concurrent validity of n-back for Chinese stroke patients.\",\"authors\":\"Xiuzhen Liu, Fang Li, Weiqun Song\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/23279095.2022.2121211\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>The objective of this study was the measurement of the test-retest reliability of n-back in Chinese stroke patients.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Seventy-five sub-acute stroke patients performed n-back twice in three days. The test-retest reliability of n-back was analyzed by correlation coefficient.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The n-back had excellent test-retest reliability in stroke patients. Pearson or Spearman coefficients ranged from 0.81 to 0.88. The intra-class correlation coefficients ranged from 0.72 to 0.87. The Chinese version of Montreal Cognitive Assessment-Basic (MoCA-BC) score was significantly correlated with the performance of n-back. MoCA-BC and n-back accuracy were significantly related in the Mild Cognitive Impairment (MCI) group (<i>r</i> = 0.60 in 1-back, <i>p</i> = .002; <i>r</i> = 0.43 in 2-back, <i>p</i> = .040). However, MoCA-BC was correlated with reaction time (RT) in the Cognitively Normal (CN) group (<i>r</i> = -0.44 in 1-back, <i>p</i> = .003; <i>r</i> = -0.36 in 2-back, <i>p</i> = .018). The test-retest reliability of CN group was mostly higher than that of MCI group RT: 0.71-0.76 in MCI, 0.80-0.88 in CN; accuracy: 0.80-0.85 in MCI, 0.75-0.86 in CN). The practice effect was observed in the CN group instead of the MCI group.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This study indicated that the test-retest reliability of n-back was high in stroke patients. N-back was correlated with cognition. It was preferable to conduct subgroup analyses according to the level of cognitive assessment of patients with stroke.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50741,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Applied Neuropsychology-Adult\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"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/10.1080/23279095.2022.2121211\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2022/9/24 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Applied Neuropsychology-Adult","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/23279095.2022.2121211","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2022/9/24 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

研究目的方法:75 名亚急性脑卒中患者在三天内进行了两次 n-back:方法:75 名亚急性脑卒中患者在三天内进行两次 n-back。方法:75 名亚急性脑卒中患者在三天内进行两次 n-back,用相关系数分析 n-back的重测可靠性:结果:n-back 在脑卒中患者中具有良好的重测信度。皮尔逊系数或斯皮尔曼系数在 0.81 至 0.88 之间。类内相关系数为 0.72 至 0.87。中文版蒙特利尔认知评估-基础(MoCA-BC)得分与 n-back 的表现有显著相关性。在轻度认知障碍(MCI)组中,MoCA-BC 和 n-back 的准确性有明显相关性(1-back 中 r = 0.60,p = .002;2-back 中 r = 0.43,p = .040)。然而,在认知正常(CN)组中,MoCA-BC 与反应时间(RT)存在相关性(1-back 中的 r = -0.44,p = .003;2-back 中的 r = -0.36,p = .018)。CN 组的重测信度大多高于 MCI 组,RT:MCI 为 0.71-0.76,CN 为 0.80-0.88;准确度:MCI 为 0.80-0.85,CN 为 0.75-0.86)。在 CN 组而不是 MCI 组观察到了练习效应:结论:本研究表明,脑卒中患者的 N-back 测试重复可靠性很高。N-back与认知能力相关。最好根据脑卒中患者的认知评估水平进行分组分析。
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
Impact of cognition on test-retest reliability and concurrent validity of n-back for Chinese stroke patients.

Objective: The objective of this study was the measurement of the test-retest reliability of n-back in Chinese stroke patients.

Methods: Seventy-five sub-acute stroke patients performed n-back twice in three days. The test-retest reliability of n-back was analyzed by correlation coefficient.

Results: The n-back had excellent test-retest reliability in stroke patients. Pearson or Spearman coefficients ranged from 0.81 to 0.88. The intra-class correlation coefficients ranged from 0.72 to 0.87. The Chinese version of Montreal Cognitive Assessment-Basic (MoCA-BC) score was significantly correlated with the performance of n-back. MoCA-BC and n-back accuracy were significantly related in the Mild Cognitive Impairment (MCI) group (r = 0.60 in 1-back, p = .002; r = 0.43 in 2-back, p = .040). However, MoCA-BC was correlated with reaction time (RT) in the Cognitively Normal (CN) group (r = -0.44 in 1-back, p = .003; r = -0.36 in 2-back, p = .018). The test-retest reliability of CN group was mostly higher than that of MCI group RT: 0.71-0.76 in MCI, 0.80-0.88 in CN; accuracy: 0.80-0.85 in MCI, 0.75-0.86 in CN). The practice effect was observed in the CN group instead of the MCI group.

Conclusions: This study indicated that the test-retest reliability of n-back was high in stroke patients. N-back was correlated with cognition. It was preferable to conduct subgroup analyses according to the level of cognitive assessment of patients with stroke.

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
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