Reliability and Feasibility of the Memory Associative Test TMA-93.
Binding
TMA-93
feasibility
inter-rater reliability
internal consistency
mild cognitive impairment
test-retest reliability
Journal
Journal of Alzheimer's disease reports
ISSN: 2542-4823
Titre abrégé: J Alzheimers Dis Rep
Pays: Netherlands
ID NLM: 101705500
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
24 Oct 2020
24 Oct 2020
Historique:
entrez:
7
12
2020
pubmed:
8
12
2020
medline:
8
12
2020
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Memory tests focused on binding may be more sensitive to diagnose Alzheimer's disease (AD) at an early phase. TMA-93 examines relational binding by images. Evaluate the reliability (internal consistency and inter-rater and test-retest reliability) and feasibility of the TMA-93 in a clinic setting with low-educated individuals and limited face-to-face time per patient. The study was undertaken in a neurology outpatient clinic of a hospital in Southern Spain. The internal consistency of the TMA-93 was estimated in 35 patients with amnestic mild cognitive impairment (aMCI) and 40 healthy controls (HCs). The inter-rater reliability (by two raters) and feasibility (by recording the percentage of participants who completed the test, and by timing the administration time) were evaluated in HCs ( The internal consistency was "optimal" (Cronbach's alpha = 0.936). The test-retest reliability was "good" [ICC = 0.802 (CI 95% = 0.653-0.887)]. The inter-rater reliability was "optimal" [ICC = 0.999, (CI 95% = 0.999-1)]. All participants completed the test. The administration time ranged from less than 3 min in HCs to 6 min in aMCI patients, and 7 min in mild dementia patients. Good feasibility and reliability support using the TMA-93 for examining visual relational binding, particularly in the context of low-educational attainment and limited time per patient.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Memory tests focused on binding may be more sensitive to diagnose Alzheimer's disease (AD) at an early phase. TMA-93 examines relational binding by images.
OBJECTIVE
OBJECTIVE
Evaluate the reliability (internal consistency and inter-rater and test-retest reliability) and feasibility of the TMA-93 in a clinic setting with low-educated individuals and limited face-to-face time per patient.
METHODS
METHODS
The study was undertaken in a neurology outpatient clinic of a hospital in Southern Spain. The internal consistency of the TMA-93 was estimated in 35 patients with amnestic mild cognitive impairment (aMCI) and 40 healthy controls (HCs). The inter-rater reliability (by two raters) and feasibility (by recording the percentage of participants who completed the test, and by timing the administration time) were evaluated in HCs (
RESULTS
RESULTS
The internal consistency was "optimal" (Cronbach's alpha = 0.936). The test-retest reliability was "good" [ICC = 0.802 (CI 95% = 0.653-0.887)]. The inter-rater reliability was "optimal" [ICC = 0.999, (CI 95% = 0.999-1)]. All participants completed the test. The administration time ranged from less than 3 min in HCs to 6 min in aMCI patients, and 7 min in mild dementia patients.
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
Good feasibility and reliability support using the TMA-93 for examining visual relational binding, particularly in the context of low-educational attainment and limited time per patient.
Identifiants
pubmed: 33283164
doi: 10.3233/ADR-200215
pii: ADR200215
pmc: PMC7683101
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
431-440Informations de copyright
© 2020 – IOS Press and the authors. All rights reserved.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
The authors have no conflict of interest to report.
Références
J Alzheimers Dis. 2016;50(4):999-1010
pubmed: 26836167
Dement Geriatr Cogn Disord. 2001 Jul-Aug;12(4):265-80
pubmed: 11351138
Arch Neurol. 1991 Mar;48(3):278-81
pubmed: 2001185
Geriatr Psychol Neuropsychiatr Vieil. 2019 Sep 1;17(3):279-289
pubmed: 31449046
Neuropsychologia. 2011 Jul;49(9):2776-83
pubmed: 21689670
J Psychiatr Res. 1989;23(1):87-96
pubmed: 2666647
Aten Primaria. 2005 Jan;35(1):14-21
pubmed: 15691450
Trends Cogn Sci. 2007 Mar;11(3):126-35
pubmed: 17270487
Psychometrika. 1945;10:255-82
pubmed: 21007983
Rev Neurol. 2001 Oct 1-15;33(7):624-7
pubmed: 11784949
J Neuropsychol. 2017 Jun;11(2):238-251
pubmed: 26560406
Alzheimers Dement. 2011 May;7(3):263-9
pubmed: 21514250
Am J Alzheimers Dis Other Demen. 2019 Aug;34(5):322-328
pubmed: 31084187
J Alzheimers Dis. 2020;75(3):871-878
pubmed: 32333587
Ann Neurol. 2010 Mar;67(3):353-64
pubmed: 20373347
Brain. 2015 May;138(Pt 5):1355-69
pubmed: 25762465
Alzheimers Dement. 2011 May;7(3):270-9
pubmed: 21514249
Alzheimer Dis Assoc Disord. 2010 Jul-Sep;24(3):284-90
pubmed: 20683186
J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 2010 Dec;81(12):1363-8
pubmed: 20881017
Int Psychogeriatr. 1997;9 Suppl 1:155-62
pubmed: 9447438
Psychol Neuropsychiatr Vieil. 2009 Dec;7(4):287-96
pubmed: 20031510
Neuroimage Clin. 2016 Dec 18;13:415-427
pubmed: 28116234
Am J Alzheimers Dis Other Demen. 2017 Dec;32(8):461-467
pubmed: 28750554
Neurology. 2014 Aug 5;83(6):510-9
pubmed: 24991033
Dement Neuropsychol. 2014 Apr-Jun;8(2):95-98
pubmed: 29213888
J Int Neuropsychol Soc. 2002 Jan;8(1):58-71
pubmed: 11843075
Am J Psychiatry. 1982 Sep;139(9):1136-9
pubmed: 7114305
Neurologia. 2013 Mar;28(2):88-94
pubmed: 22652137
Neurologia. 2007 Dec;22(10):860-9
pubmed: 18040903
Alzheimers Res Ther. 2017 Apr 17;9(1):27
pubmed: 28412978
Cogn Psychol. 1980 Jan;12(1):97-136
pubmed: 7351125
Neurologia. 2018 May 28;:
pubmed: 29853272
Brain. 2009 Apr;132(Pt 4):1057-66
pubmed: 19293236
Neurology. 2004 Apr 27;62(8):1317-22
pubmed: 15111668
Front Neurol. 2020 Jun 10;11:458
pubmed: 32587567
J Neurol. 2010 Jul;257(7):1160-9
pubmed: 20162428