[討論] 20191003 討論議題

【自覺記憶功能評估工具之回顧與評論】

關於區辨效度，老師建議結果宜採「等級」方式呈現，但有幾點疑惑：

1.    若要將區辨效度分等級，想到的辦法去利用該研究兩組的mean和SD去計算Effect size，但算有客觀數據(如ES)，但其區辨驗證對象不同(有Low memory, MCI, and Dementia三者)，這樣缺乏客觀的可比較性，也就是區辨對象不同時，無法證實A研究(健康/Dementia)就是優於B研究(健康/MCI)，。

2.    針對等級的劃分，老師先前給的建議是「看數據(mean值)，差異大代表良好，若僅統計顯著，那代表可接受。」。但以下四篇研究所提供數據不一致(部分研究沒有提供mean值)，故各評估工具間無法統一用「等級」(良好/可接受)去比較，且缺乏可引用作為判斷準則之參考文獻。

3.    目前想到的解決辦法就是，有顯著則呈現”acceptable”，若不顯著則呈現”unacceptable”，不知道是否適切? (修改成黃色背景欄位)

各評估工具之區辨效度統整表格如下：

評估工具	EMQ-20 items	EMQ-11 items	MMQ-Original	SMCQ-Original
區辨效度（原）	Normal (n=102) / Low memory (n=10) p<0.001	Normal (n=766) / MCI (n=78) p<0.001	Normal (n=20) / Low memory (n=12) p=0.003	Normal (n=1464) / Dementia (n=187) p<0.001
區辨效度（修）	Normal / Low memory: acceptable	Normal / MCI: acceptable	Normal / Low memory: acceptable	Normal / Dementia: acceptable
該文章區辨效度驗證結果的相關資訊	Ÿ Scores on the 20-item EMQ were lower in the Normal Memory (M=44.6±16.7) than in the Low Performance group (M=75.1±24.4) [t(28)=3.71, p<0.001].	Ÿ FII (U = 17,175; p < 0.001), EF (U = 17,651; p < 0.001) and PM (U = 19,015; p < 0.001) were found to differentiate between both groups.	Ÿ Scores on MMQ-Contentment were lower in the low-memory group (M = 30.7) than the normal-memory group (M = 43.1), t(30) = 3.10, p = .004. Ÿ Similarly, scores on MMQ-Ability were lower in the low memory group (M = 37.3) than the normal-memory group (M = 46.2), t(30) = 3.19, p = .003.	Ÿ The SMCQ-T, SMCQ-G and SMCQ-E scores were all significantly higher in the dementia patients than in the elderly subjects without dementia after adjustment for the influence of age, sex, education and depressive symptoms (F = 55.4, d.f. = 1,645, p < 0.001), indicating that the SMCQ had discriminant properties for dementia ( table 3 ).