The server is under maintenance between 08:00 to 12:00 (GMT+08:00), and please visit later.
We apologize for any inconvenience caused
Login  | Sign Up  |  Oriprobe Inc. Feed
China/Asia On Demand
Journal Articles
Laws/Policies/Regulations
Companies/Products
Bookmark and Share
Validity and Reliability of Chinese Version of Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale
Author(s): 
Pages: 89-93
Year: Issue:  2
Journal: CHINESE JOURNAL OF CLINICAL PSYCHOLOGY

Keyword:  阿尔茨海默病阿尔茨海默病评定量表信度效度;
Abstract: 目的:评价阿尔茨海默病评定量表(Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale, ADAS)中文译本的效度和信度.方法:选取20例符合NINCDS-ADRDA诊断标准的很可能AD患者为被试,两名评定者盲法评定,通过评定者间一致性评价量表信度.进行ADAS、MMSE、GDS、ADL和Blessed Roth量表评分,通过相关分析考察量表效度.ADAS各条目评分进行相关分析,以评价量表内部结构的相关性.结果:量表各条目的评定者间一致性kappa值均在0.75以上(p<0.05).ADAS认知部分各条目评分彼此呈高度正相关(p<0.05),非认知部分多数条目评分无显著相关性.不同GDS等级间认知总分、非认知总分及全量表总分存在显著差异.认知部分总分与MMSE总分呈显著负相关(r=0.803,p<0.01),与ADL(r=0.463,p<0.05)及Blessed Roth痴呆量表(r=0.458,p<0.05)评分均呈显著正相关.非认知部分与MMSE、ADL及Blessed-Roth痴呆量表评分无显著相关.ADAS总分与MMSE总分呈显著负相关(r=-0.778,p<0.01),与Blessed-Roth量表(r=0.448,p<0.01)评分呈显著正相关,与ADL评分无显著相关.结论:ADAS具有较好的信度和效度,临床上可使用该量表评定AD严重程度.
Related Articles
No related articles found