文章摘要
蒋 衍,程灶火.ADAS⁃Cog在我国老年人群中的结构效度[J].南京医科大学学报,2020,(5):732~736
ADAS⁃Cog在我国老年人群中的结构效度
Construct validity of Alzheimer’s disease assessment scale ⁃ cognitive subscale(ADAS⁃Cog)among Chinese older people
投稿时间:2019-10-29  
DOI:10.7655/NYDXBNS20200521
中文关键词: ADAS⁃Cog  阿尔茨海默病  轻度认知障碍  效度
英文关键词: ADAS⁃Cog  Alzheimer’s disease  mild cognitive impairment  validity
基金项目:江苏省社会发展重点项目(BE2015615)
作者单位
蒋 衍 南京医科大学附属无锡精神卫生中心临床心理科江苏 无锡 214151 
程灶火 南京医科大学附属无锡精神卫生中心临床心理科江苏 无锡 214151 
摘要点击次数: 50
全文下载次数: 39
中文摘要:
      目的:评估我国老年人群中的阿尔茨海默病疾病评估量表?认知子量表(Alzheimer’s disease assessment scale?cognitive subscale,ADAS?Cog)的结构效度。方法:收集628例正常对照,572例轻度认知障碍(mild cognitive impairment,MCI)和76例阿尔茨海默病(Alzheimer’s disease,AD),评估ADAS?Cog的结构效度。结果:ADAS?Cog在AD和MCI组的条目与总分相关系数分别在0.51~0.83和0.27~0.69之间。AD组的结构效度优于MCI组,但均较为一般。AD组的因子分析中得到记忆(包括单词回忆和单词辨认)和认知功能(其他所有项目)2个因子,解释63.23%的方差。MCI组提取出记忆(包括单词回忆和单词辨认)、语言(包括回忆测验、口头语言、找词困难和口语理解)、意象(包括物体命名和意象练习)和执行命令4个因子,累计方差解释率为68.02%。结论:ADAS?Cog在评估AD人群方面具有良好的条目相关性和结构效度,但在MCI人群上则较差。
英文摘要:
      Objective:This study aims to evaluate the construct validity of the Alzheimer’s disease assessment scale ? cognitive subscale(ADAS?Cog)among Chinese older people population. Methods:A total of 628 normal controls,572 patients with mild cognitive impairment(MCI) and 76 patients with Alzheimer’s disease(AD) were collected to assess the construct validity of ADAS?Cog. Results:In general,the correlation coefficients between the scale and the total scores of ADAS?Cog in AD and MCI groups were between 0.51?0.83 and 0.27?0.69. The construct validity of AD group was better than that of MCI group,but all of them were not good enough. In the factor analysis of the AD group,two factors were analyzed:memory(including word recall and word recognition)and cognitive function(all other scales),which accounted for 63.23% of total variance. Four factors were extracted from the MCI group:memory(including word recall and word recognition),language(including recall of test instructions,spoken language ability,word?finding difficulty and comprehension of spoken language),ideation(including naming objects and fingers and ideational praxis)and commands,with a cumulative variance interpretation rate of 68.02%. Conclusion:This study confirmed that ADAS?Cog had good item correlation and structural validity in evaluating AD population,but was poor in MCI population.
查看全文   查看/发表评论  下载PDF阅读器