Is there any difference between the findings of Clock Drawing Tests if the clocks show different times?
| Autor: | Krisztina Boda, Magdolna Pákáski, Zoltán Janka, Gábor Vincze, Anna Tünde Patocskai, Máté Fullajtár, Gergely Drótos, János Kálmán, Irma Szimjanovszki |
|---|---|
| Rok vydání: | 2013 |
| Předmět: |
Male
medicine.medical_specialty Psychometrics Audiology Neuropsychological Tests Cohort Studies Evaluation methods medicine Dementia Humans Cognitive decline Geriatric Assessment Aged Aged 80 and over Hungary General Neuroscience General Medicine Middle Aged medicine.disease Rapid assessment Psychiatry and Mental health Clinical Psychology Semiquantitative Method Female Geriatrics and Gerontology Psychology Nursing homes Clock drawing test Semi quantitative Clinical psychology |
| Zdroj: | Journal of Alzheimer's disease : JAD. 39(4) |
| ISSN: | 1875-8908 |
| Popis: | BACKGROUND The Clock Drawing Test (CDT) is a widely-used, rapid assessment tool for the screening of cognitive decline though its evaluation and interpretation are still not uniform. The aim of present study was to investigate the difference in sensitivity and specificity of two types of CDTs and to compare the clinical benefits of quantitative and semiquantitative scoring systems. OBJECTIVE To investigate the difference in sensitivity and specificity of two types of CDTs and to compare the clinical benefits of quantitative and semiquantitative scoring systems. METHODS Six hundred and ninety-two participants with or without dementia completed 10-item CDTs in nursing homes in two counties in southern Hungary. The dementia was not further subclassified. The results of the two tests, CDT1 (representing five minutes to a quarter to four) and CDT2 (representing ten past five), were evaluated quantitatively and semiquantitatively. RESULTS In the quantitative evaluation, the sensitivity and the specificity for the diagnosis of dementia at cut-off scores of 7 points were determined: 87.1% and 51.9%, respectively, for CDT1, and 81.7% and 57% for CDT2, respectively. The semiquantitative analysis revealed a sensitivity of 67.3% and a specificity of 65.3% for CDT1, and of 64.6% and 66.6% for CDT2, respectively. CONCLUSION The results of CDT tests do not appear to depend on the positions of the clock hands and additionally suggest that the quantitative evaluation method is more sensitive than the semiquantitative method. |
| Databáze: | OpenAIRE |
| Externí odkaz: |
|