查詢結果分析
相關文獻
- 「嬰幼兒綜合發展測驗」動作分測驗與「皮巴迪動作發展量表第二版」的診斷準確度
- 危險評估中ROC曲線在預測2×2表上與敏感度及特異度之關係
- 修訂版長谷川氏痴呆量表的效度研究
- 血清免疫檢驗醫學--臨床應用
- T-STAT評估18~24個月自閉症類嬰幼兒效度探究
- 克氏行為量表篩檢4歲以下自閉症類疾患兒童效度探究
- The Revised Hasegawa's Dementia Scale (HDS-R) as a Screening Tool for Delirium
- Performance of Antinuclear Antibody and Anti-Extractable Nuclear Antigen Antibody Tests in the Diagnosis of Autoimmune Diseases
- Diagnostic Performance of Tests for Anti-cyclic Citrullinated Peptides and Rheumatoid Factor in Rheumatoid Arthritis
- Use of Serum Level of Immunoglobulin G4 in the Differential Diagnosis of Autoimmune Pancreatitis and Pancreatic Cancer
頁籤選單縮合
題 名 | 「嬰幼兒綜合發展測驗」動作分測驗與「皮巴迪動作發展量表第二版」的診斷準確度=Diagnostic Accuracy of the Motor Subtest of Comprehensive Developmental Inventory for Infants and Toddlers and the Peabody Developmental Motor Scales-Second Edition |
---|---|
作 者 | 吳雪玉; 廖華芳; 姚開屏; 李旺祚; 王天苗; 謝正宜; | 書刊名 | 臺灣醫學 |
卷 期 | 9:3 2005.05[民94.05] |
頁 次 | 頁312-322 |
分類號 | 417.5847 |
關鍵詞 | 動作評估; 敏感度; 特異度; 診斷準確率; ROC曲線; 發展障礙兒童; Child; Diagnostic accuracy; Motor assessment; Receiver operating characteristics curve; Sensitivity; Specificity; |
語 文 | 中文(Chinese) |
中文摘要 | 目的:l)以臨床診斷為基準,探討「嬰幼兒綜合發展測驗」(Comprehensive Developmental Inventory for Infants and Toddlers,簡稱CDIIT)動作分測驗(Motor subtest,簡稱CDIITMS)與「皮巴迪動作發展量表第二版」(Peabody Developmental Motor Scales 2(上標 nd),簡稱PDM-2)對動作發展障礙兒童之診斷準確率;2)求得兩量表不同分界點之敏感度、特異度、陽性概率比與陰性概率比,並由相關研究所提之盛行率提供各分界點之陽性預測率與陰性預測率,以為臨床使用此兩量表的參考。方法:本研究共收取動作障礙兒童85位,與一般兒童137名。由同一位測驗者對受試者同時施以兩種量表的測驗,再依各量表的評分標準計分。依臨床診斷為判別基準,以Receiver operating characteristics (ROC)曲線的面積推估CDIITMS與PDMS-2的診斷準確率。並以列聯表分析兩量表在各個不同分界分數的診斷估計值,並由估計盛行率計算陽性預測率與陰性預測率。結果:CDIITMS ROC曲線面積為0.97, PDMS-2則為0.98,具顯著之高診斷準確率(P<0.001)。綜合判斷CDIITMS之最佳分界點為動作發展商數70,其敏感度為87%,特異度97%,陽性概率比29.0,陰性概率比0.13,以6%盛行率推估得陽性預測率65%,陰性預測率為99%。而PDMS-2之最佳分界點為動作發展商數85,其敏感度為81%,特異度99%,陽性概率比81.0,陰性概率比0.19, 陽性預測率84%,陰性預測率為99%;兩量表與臨床診斷之Kappa係數分別為0.86與0.82(P<0.001),具顯著高相關。結論:CDIITMS與PDMS-2皆具高的診斷準確率,各項診斷估計值大致符合標準,為學前兒童可用之動作發展評估工具。 |
英文摘要 | Purpose: 1) Using clinical diagnosis as thee criterion to investigate the overall diagnostic accuracy of both the motor subtest of the Comprehensive Developmental Inventory for Infants and Toddlers (CDIIT) and the Peabody Developmental Motor Scales-Second Edition (PDMS-2).2) To investigate the sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio (LR+), and negative likelihood ratio (LR-), and then to use the prevalence rates of 4%, 6%, 9% to calculate the corresponding positive and negative predictive value (PPV & NPV) for clinical application of both scales. Methods: Eighty-five children with motor disabilities and 137 non-disabled children were recruited for this study. Both the CDIIT and PDMS-2 were administered by the same tester. The area under the receiver operating characteristics (ROC) curve was used to investigate the overall diagnostic accuracy of both tests. The cross-tabs ere used to calculate the diagnostic estimates, and then the estimated prevalence rate as used to calculate the PPR and NPR. Results: The overall diagnostic accuracy of the t o scales as high, with ROC area 0.97 in the CDIIT, and 0.98 in PDMS-2 (P<0.001). The best cutoff point of the CDIIT was developmental quotient 70, with sensitivity 87%, specificity 97%, LR+29.0, LR-0.13. While a 6% prevalence rate as assumed, the PPV and NPV ere 65% and 99% respectively. And the best cutoff point of PDMS-2 was developmental quotient 85 with sensitivity 81%, specificity 99%, LR+81.0, and LR-0.19. The PPV of the PDMS-2 as 84%, and the NPV as 99%. The correlations between both scales and the clinical diagnoses were high with Kappa coefficients of 0.86 and 0.82 respectively (P<0.001). Conclusions: Both scales had good and similar diagnostic accuracy. The diagnosis estimates of both scales ere slightly different but within an acceptable range. Both scales are useful for motor development evaluation in preschool children. |
本系統中英文摘要資訊取自各篇刊載內容。