Home › Research › Prevention trials
Validation of the Edinburgh Cognitive and Behavioural Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis Screen (ECAS): A cognitive tool for motor disorders
Elaine Niven, Judith Lowder Newton, Jennifer A. Foley, Shuna Colville, Robert J Swingler, Siddharthan Chandran, Thomas H. Bak, Sharon Abrahams. Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis and Frontotemporal Degeneration, 2015-04-27
Topic: Brain imaging, connectivity and assessment
Our objective was to assess the validity of the Edinburgh Cognitive and Behaviour ALS Screen (ECAS), a multi-domain screen designed to detect cognitive deficits in patients with motor disorders. Forty ALS patients (without pre-diagnosed dementia) and 40, age-, gender- and education-matched healthy controls were recruited. All participants underwent extensive neuropsychological assessment and the ECAS. Performance at neuropsychological assessment across five domains (fluency, executive function, language, memory and visuospatial function) was compared to the ECAS ALS-Specific (fluency, executive functions and social cognition, language), ALS Non-specific (memory, visuospatial functions), and Total scores. Data from the healthy controls produced population-based abnormality cut-offs: composite score performance ≤ 2 SD in any domain classified impairment at neuropsychological assessment. Thirty-three percent of patients were impaired, most commonly in a single domain (executive or language dysfunction). Receiver Operator Curve (ROC) analyses using ECAS Total scores and ALS-Specific scores revealed 85% sensitivity and 85% specificity in the detection of cognitive impairment characteristic of ALS (fluency, executive function, language). A five-point borderline range produced optimal values (ALS-Specific Score 77-82, and ECAS-Total Score 105-110). In conclusion, validation against gold standard extensive neuropsychology demonstrated that the ECAS is a screening tool with high sensitivity and specificity to impairment characteristic of ALS.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Niven, E., Newton, J. L., Foley, J. A., Colville, S., Swingler, R. J., Chandran, S., et al. (2015). Validation of the Edinburgh Cognitive and Behavioural Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis Screen (ECAS): A cognitive tool for motor disorders. Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis and Frontotemporal Degeneration. https://doi.org/10.3109/21678421.2015.1030430
Vancouver
Niven E, Newton JL, Foley JA, Colville S, Swingler RJ, Chandran S, et al. Validation of the Edinburgh Cognitive and Behavioural Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis Screen (ECAS): A cognitive tool for motor disorders. Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis and Frontotemporal Degeneration. 2015. doi:10.3109/21678421.2015.1030430. PMID: 25967542.
BibTeX
@article{niven2015-25967542,
author = {Niven, Elaine and Newton, Judith Lowder and Foley, Jennifer A. and Colville, Shuna and Swingler, Robert J and Chandran, Siddharthan and Bak, Thomas H. and Abrahams, Sharon},
title = {{Validation of the Edinburgh Cognitive and Behavioural Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis Screen (ECAS): A cognitive tool for motor disorders}},
journal = {Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis and Frontotemporal Degeneration},
year = {2015},
doi = {10.3109/21678421.2015.1030430},
pmid = {25967542},
url = {https://doi.org/10.3109/21678421.2015.1030430}
}
Built from the record alzhub holds for this paper, not looked up. Volume, issue and page numbers are not held in the record. The record names 8 authors; APA and Vancouver show the first six, BibTeX and the downloads carry all of them. Check the citation against the original before you use it.
Key findings
- Performance at neuropsychological assessment across five domains (fluency, executive function, language, memory and visuospatial function) was compared to the ECAS ALS-Specific (fluency, executive functions and social cognition, language), ALS Non-specific (memory, visuospatial functions), and Total scores.
- Receiver Operator Curve (ROC) analyses using ECAS Total scores and ALS-Specific scores revealed 85% sensitivity and 85% specificity in the detection of cognitive impairment characteristic of ALS (fluency, executive function, language).
- In conclusion, validation against gold standard extensive neuropsychology demonstrated that the ECAS is a screening tool with high sensitivity and specificity to impairment characteristic of ALS.
New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Prevention →
Study details
- Evidence strengthLow
How this study scored 40/100
Published in a peer-reviewed journal. Scored zero for study design, sample size, effect reported, studied in people and randomised / blinded because the record does not state it. We have no data on journal's citation record, times cited, citations per year, impact for its field and year, cited by studies here, still being cited, senior author's track record, institution's track record and multi-centre collaboration, so those were left out: it earned 23 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 40 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 7 / 10 | Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis and Frontotemporal Degeneration) |
| Journal's citation record | — / 4 | No journal record from OpenAlex — left out of this score |
| Study design | 0 / 12 | No study design recorded — scores zero, not guessed (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Strength of evidence | 1 / 5 | Rated “low” in our summary |
| Peer-review validation | 10 / 10 | Peer-reviewed. Published as an article in a named peer-reviewed journal. |
| How recent | 1 / 5 | 2015 — within 20 year(s) of the newest study here |
| Sample size | 0 / 4 | Participant count not stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Effect reported | 0 / 3 | No effect size reported — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Studied in people | 0 / 3 | Not stated whether this was studied in people — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Randomised / blinded | 0 / 2 | No randomisation or blinding stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Times cited | — / 7 | No citation count (not found in OpenAlex) — left out of this score |
| Citations per year | — / 5 | No citation count or no year — left out of this score |
| Impact for its field and year | — / 6 | No field-weighted citation impact (OpenAlex has none yet) — left out of this score |
| Cited by studies here | — / 6 | Not yet checked against this library's citation graph — left out of this score |
| Still being cited | — / 4 | No yearly citation counts — left out of this score |
| Senior author's track record | — / 4 | Senior author's record not available — left out of this score |
| Institution's track record | — / 3 | No institution listed in OpenAlex — left out of this score |
| Multi-centre collaboration | — / 3 | Institutions not listed — left out of this score |
| Indexed in PubMed | 2 / 2 | Indexed in PubMed (PMID 25967542) |
| Free to read | 2 / 2 | Free to read |
| Points | 23 / 58 | Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 23 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 40 out of 100. |
| Total | 40 / 100 | — |
What each of these 20 components measures, and what this score is not →
Read the original
Free copy unknown: no free-copy check has an answer for this record yet. That does not mean it is paywalled.
Related studies in Prevention trials
Also tagged “computerized”
238 studies in the library carry the topic tag “computerized”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 238 tagged studies.