Searching for just a few words should be enough to get started. If you need to make more complex queries, use the tips below to guide you.
Article type: Research Article
Authors: Patocskai, Anna Tündea; * | Pákáski, Magdolnaa | Vincze, Gáborb | Fullajtár, Mátéa | Szimjanovszki, Irmac | Drótos, Gergelya | Boda, Krisztinac | Janka, Zoltána | Kálmán, Jánosa
Affiliations: [a] Alzheimer's Disease Research Centre, Department of Psychiatry, University of Szeged, Szeged, Hungary | [b] Department of Psychiatry, Békés County Hospital, Gyula, Hungary | [c] Medical Informatics, Faculty of Medicine, University of Szeged, Szeged, Hungary
Correspondence: [*] Correspondence to: Anna Tünde Patocskai, MD, Alzheimer's Disease Research Centre, Department of Psychiatry, University of Szeged, 57 Kálvária Ave, H-6725 Szeged, Hungary. Tel.: +36 62 546851; Fax: +36 62 545370; E-mail: [email protected].
Abstract: 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.
Keywords: Clock drawing test, cognitive disorders, dementia, early diagnosis, sensitivity, specificity
DOI: 10.3233/JAD-131313
Journal: Journal of Alzheimer's Disease, vol. 39, no. 4, pp. 749-757, 2014
IOS Press, Inc.
6751 Tepper Drive
Clifton, VA 20124
USA
Tel: +1 703 830 6300
Fax: +1 703 830 2300
[email protected]
For editorial issues, like the status of your submitted paper or proposals, write to [email protected]
IOS Press
Nieuwe Hemweg 6B
1013 BG Amsterdam
The Netherlands
Tel: +31 20 688 3355
Fax: +31 20 687 0091
[email protected]
For editorial issues, permissions, book requests, submissions and proceedings, contact the Amsterdam office [email protected]
Inspirees International (China Office)
Ciyunsi Beili 207(CapitaLand), Bld 1, 7-901
100025, Beijing
China
Free service line: 400 661 8717
Fax: +86 10 8446 7947
[email protected]
For editorial issues, like the status of your submitted paper or proposals, write to [email protected]
如果您在出版方面需要帮助或有任何建, 件至: [email protected]