請用此 Handle URI 來引用此文件:
http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/4845
完整後設資料紀錄
DC 欄位 | 值 | 語言 |
---|---|---|
dc.contributor.advisor | 劉宏輝(Horng-Huei Liou) | |
dc.contributor.author | Yun-Ru Lu | en |
dc.contributor.author | 盧韻如 | zh_TW |
dc.date.accessioned | 2021-05-14T17:48:36Z | - |
dc.date.available | 2020-03-12 | |
dc.date.available | 2021-05-14T17:48:36Z | - |
dc.date.copyright | 2015-03-12 | |
dc.date.issued | 2015 | |
dc.date.submitted | 2015-02-02 | |
dc.identifier.citation | 1. Wolfson C, Wolfson DB, Asgharian M, et al. A reevaluation of the duration of survival after the onset of dementia. New England Journal of Medicine 2001;344:1111-1116. 2. Neumann P, Araki S, Arcelus A, et al. Measuring Alzheimer’s disease progression with transition probabilities Estimates from CERAD. Neurology 2001;57:957-964. 3. American Psychiatric Association A, Association AP. Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders. 1994. 4. Larson EB, Kukull WA, Katzman RL. Cognitive impairment: dementia and Alzheimer's disease. Annual review of public health 1992;13:431-449. 5. Breteler MM, Claus JJ, van Duijn CM, Launer LJ, Hofman A. Epidemiology of Alzheimer's disease. Epidemiologic Reviews 1992;14:59-82. 6. Zhang M, Katzman R, Salmon D, et al. The prevalence of dementia and Alzheimer's disease in Shanghai, China: impact of age, gender, and education. Annals of neurology 1990;27:428-437. 7. Meguro K, Ishii H, Yamaguchi S, et al. Prevalence of dementia and dementing diseases in Japan: the Tajiri project. Archives of neurology 2002;59:1109-1114. 8. Lee DY, Lee JH, Ju YS, et al. The prevalence of dementia in older people in an urban population of Korea: the Seoul study. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society 2002;50:1233-1239. 9. Lyketsos CG, Sheppard J-ME, Steele CD, et al. Randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind clinical trial of sertraline in the treatment of depression complicating Alzheimer’s disease: initial results from the Depression in Alzheimer’s Disease study. American Journal of Psychiatry 2000;157:1686-1689. 10. O'connor D, Pollitt P, Hyde J, Brook C, Reiss B, Roth M. Do general practitioners miss dementia in elderly patients? BMJ: British Medical Journal 1988;297:1107. 11. Cooper B, Bickel H, Schaufele M. Early development and progression of dementing illness in the elderly: a general-practice based study. Psychological medicine 1996;26:411-420. 12. Lagaay AM, Van Der Meij JC, Hijmans W. Validation of medical history taking as part of a population based survey in subjects aged 85 and over. BMJ: British Medical Journal 1992;304:1091. 13. Iliffe S, Mitchley S, Gould M, Haines A. Evaluation of the use of brief screening instruments for dementia, depression and problem drinking among elderly people in general practice. The British Journal of General Practice 1994;44:503. 14. Ernst RL, Hay JW. The US economic and social costs of Alzheimer's disease revisited. American Journal of Public Health 1994;84:1261-1264. 15. Evans DA. Estimated prevalence of Alzheimer's disease in the United States. The Milbank Quarterly 1990:267-289. 16. Van Duijn C, Clayton D, Chandra V, et al. Familial aggregation of Alzheimer's disease and related disorders: a collaborative re-analysis of case-control studies. International Journal of Epidemiology 1991;20:S13-S20. 17. Oacute;lafsd oacute;ttir M, Skoog I, Marcusson J. Detection of dementia in primary care: the Link ouml;ping study. Dementia and geriatric cognitive disorders 2000;11:223-229. 18. Sternberg SA, Wolfson C, Baumgarten M. Undetected dementia in community-dwelling older people: the Canadian Study of Health and Aging. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society 2000;48:1430-1434. 19. Valcour VG, Masaki KH, Curb JD, Blanchette PL. The detection of dementia in the primary care setting. Archives of Internal Medicine 2000;160:2964-2968. 20. Shulman KI. Clock‐drawing: is it the ideal cognitive screening test? International journal of geriatric psychiatry 2000;15:548-561. 21. Pfeffer R, Kurosaki T, Harrah C, Chance J, Filos S. Measurement of functional activities in older adults in the community. Journal of gerontology 1982;37:323-329. 22. Fuh J-L, Teng EL, Lin K-N, et al. The Informant Questionnaire on Cognitive Decline in the Elderly (IQCODE) as a screening tool for dementia for a predominantly illiterate Chinese population. Neurology 1995;45:92-96. 23. Barberger-Gateau P, Commenges D, Gagnon M, Letenneur L, Sauvel C, Dartigues J-F. Instrumental activities of daily living as a screening tool for cognitive impairment and dementia in elderly community dwellers. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society 1992. 24. Jorm AF. Assessment of cognitive impairment and dementia using informant reports. Clinical Psychology Review 1996;16:51-73. 25. Galvin J RC, Powlishta K, . The AD8 A brief informant interview to detect dementia. Neurology 2005;65:559-564. 26. Yang Y-H, Galvin JE, Morris JC, Lai C-L, Chou M-C, Liu C-K. Application of AD8 questionnaire to screen very mild dementia in Taiwanese. American journal of Alzheimer's disease and other dementias 2011;26:134-138. 27. Saito E, Nakamoto BK, Mendez MF, Mehta B, McMurtray A. Cost Effective Community Based Dementia Screening: A Markov Model Simulation. International journal of Alzheimer's disease 2014;2014. 28. Yu S-Y, Lee T-J, Jang S-H, Han JW, Kim TH, Kim KW. Cost-Effectiveness of Nationwide Opportunistic Screening Program for Dementia in South Korea. Journal of Alzheimer's Disease 2014. 29. Jorm A, Korten A, Henderson A. The prevalence of dementia: a quantitative integration of the literature. Acta psychiatrica scandinavica 1987;76:465-479. 30. Wang W, Wu S, Cheng X, et al. Prevalence of Alzheimer’s disease and other dementing disorders in an urban community of Beijing, China. Neuroepidemiology 2000;19:194-200. 31. Rin H, Huang M, Tseng M. Prevalence of elderly dementias in Taipei area. Proc Ann Meeting Soc Neurol Psychiatry, ROC; 1987. 32. Liu H-C, Fuh J-L, Wang S-J, et al. Prevalence and subtypes of dementia in a rural Chinese population. Alzheimer Disease Associated Disorders 1998;12:127-139. 33. Liu H-C, Lin K-N, Teng EL, et al. Prevalence and subtypes of dementia in Taiwan: A community survey of 5297 individuals. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society 1995. 34. Andersen K, Launer LJ, Dewey ME, et al. Gender differences in the incidence of AD and vascular dementia The EURODEM Studies. Neurology 1999;53:1992-1992. 35. Yip AG, Brayne C, Matthews FE. Risk factors for incident dementia in England and Wales: The Medical Research Council Cognitive Function and Ageing Study. A population-based nested case–control study. Age and ageing 2006;35:154-160. 36. Corbo R, Scacchi R. Apolipoprotein E (APOE) allele distribution in the world. Is APOE* 4 a ‘thrifty’allele? Annals of human genetics 1999;63:301-310. 37. Breteler M. Vascular risk factors for Alzheimer’s disease:: An epidemiologic perspective. Neurobiology of aging 2000;21:153-160. 38. Biessels GJ, Staekenborg S, Brunner E, Brayne C, Scheltens P. Risk of dementia in diabetes mellitus: a systematic review. The Lancet Neurology 2006;5:64-74. 39. Jellinger KA. Head injury and dementia. Current opinion in neurology 2004;17:719-723. 40. Launer LJ, Andersen K, Dewey ME, et al. Rates and risk factors for dementia and Alzheimer's disease: results from EURODEM pooled analyses. EURODEM Incidence Research Group and Work Groups. European Studies of Dementia. Neurology 1999;52:78-84. 41. Heyman A, Fillenbaum G, Prosnitz B, Raiford K, Burchett B, Clark C. Estimated prevalence of dementia among elderly black and white community residents. Archives of neurology 1991;48:594-598. 42. Skoog I, Nilsson L, Palmertz B, Andreasson L-A, Svanborg A. A population-based study of dementia in 85-year-olds. New England Journal of Medicine 1993;328:153-158. 43. Aronson MK, Ooi WL, Geva DL, Masur D, Blau A, Frishman W. Dementia: age-dependent incidence, prevalence, and mortality in the old old. Archives of Internal Medicine 1991;151:989-992. 44. Beck JC, Benson DF, Scheibel AB, Spar JE, Rubenstein LZ. Dementia in the elderly: the silent epidemic. Annals of Internal Medicine 1982;97:231-241. 45. McKhann GM, Knopman DS, Chertkow H, et al. The diagnosis of dementia due to Alzheimer’s disease: Recommendations from the National Institute on Aging-Alzheimer’s Association workgroups on diagnostic guidelines for Alzheimer's disease. Alzheimer's Dementia 2011;7:263-269. 46. Albert MS, DeKosky ST, Dickson D, et al. The diagnosis of mild cognitive impairment due to Alzheimer’s disease: Recommendations from the National Institute on Aging-Alzheimer’s Association workgroups on diagnostic guidelines for Alzheimer's disease. Alzheimer's Dementia 2011;7:270-279. 47. Luchsinger JA, Noble JM, Scarmeas N. Diet and Alzheimer’s disease. Current neurology and neuroscience reports 2007;7:366-372. 48. Callahan CM, Hendrie HC, Tierney WM. Documentation and evaluation of cognitive impairment in elderly primary care patients. Annals of Internal Medicine 1995;122:422-429. 49. Ross GW, Abbott RD, Petrovitch H, et al. Frequency and Characteristics of Silent Dementia Among Elderly Japanese-American MenThe Honolulu-Asia Aging Study. Jama 1997;277:800-805. 50. Costa P, Williams T, Albert M, et al. Early identification of Alzheimer's disease and related dementias. AMERICAN FAMILY PHYSICIAN 1997;55:1303-1314. 51. Hasselblad V, Hedges LV. Meta-analysis of screening and diagnostic tests. Psychological bulletin 1995;117:167. 52. McDowell I, Kristjansson B, Hill G, Hebert R. Community screening for dementia: the Mini Mental State Exam (MMSE) and modified Mini-mental State Exam (3MS) compared. Journal of clinical epidemiology 1997;50:377-383. 53. Folstein MF, Folstein SE, McHugh PR. “Mini-mental state”: a practical method for grading the cognitive state of patients for the clinician. Journal of Psychiatric Research 1975;12:189-198. 54. Galvin J, Roe C, Powlishta K, et al. The AD8 A brief informant interview to detect dementia. Neurology 2005;65:559-564. 55. Ryu HJ1 KH, Han SH. Validity and reliability of the Korean version of the AD8 informant interview (K-AD8) in dementia. Alzheimer disease and associated disorders 2009;23:371-376. 56. Wilder D, Cross P, Chen J, et al. Operating characteristics of brief screens for dementia in a multicultural population. The American Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry 1995;3:96-107. 57. Boustani M, Peterson B, Hanson L, Harris R, Lohr KN. Screening for dementia in primary care: a summary of the evidence for the US Preventive Services Task Force. Annals of Internal Medicine 2003;138:927-937. 58. Law S, Wolfson C. Validation of a French version of an informant-based questionnaire as a screening test for Alzheimer's disease. The British Journal of Psychiatry 1995;167:541-544. 59. Lawrence JM, Davidoff DA, Katt‐Lloyd D, Connell A, Berlow YA, Savoie JA. Is Large‐Scale Community Memory Screening Feasible? Experience from a Regional Memory‐Screening Day. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society 2003;51:1072-1078. 60. Lawrence J, Davidoff D, Katt-Lloyd D, Auerbach M, Hennen J. A pilot program of improved methods for community-based screening for dementia. The American Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry 2001;9:205-211. 61. Lantz M. Telling the Patient the Diagnosis of Alzheimer's Disease: Is Truth-Telling Always Best? Clinical Geriatrics 2004;12:22-25. 62. Turnbull Q, Wolf AM, Holroyd S. Attitudes of elderly subjects toward “truth telling” for the diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease. Journal of geriatric psychiatry and neurology 2003;16:90-93. 63. Sano M. Current concepts in the prevention of Alzheimer’s disease. CNS Spectr 2003;8:846-853. 64. Chiang CL. Introduction to stochastic processes in biostatistics: Wiley New York, 1968. 65. Chen TH, Kuo H, Yen M, Lai M, Tabar L, Duffy S. Estimation of sojourn time in chronic disease screening without data on interval cases. Biometrics 2000;56:167-172. 66. Liou HH, Wu CY, Chiu YH, et al. Natural history and effectiveness of early detection of Parkinson’s disease: results from two community‐based programmes in Taiwan (KCIS no. 11). Journal of evaluation in clinical practice 2008;14:198-202. 67. Chang H-J, Kuo H-S, Tung T-H, Chou P, Chen TH-H. Evaluation of a population-based screening for type 2 diabetes: a community-based screening project in Puli, Taiwan. Preventive medicine 2000;31:396-402. 68. Chen TH-H, Yen M-F, Tung T-H. A computer simulation model for cost–effectiveness analysis of mass screening for Type 2 diabetes mellitus. Diabetes research and clinical practice 2001;54:37-42. 69. Liu WJ, Lee LT, Yen MF, et al. Assessing progression and efficacy of treatment for diabetic retinopathy following the proliferative pathway to blindness: implication for diabetic retinopathy screening in Taiwan. Diabetic medicine 2003;20:727-733. 70. Yen AM-F, Chen H-H. Stochastic models for multiple pathways of temporal natural history on co-morbidity of chronic disease. Computational Statistics Data Analysis 2013;57:570-588. 71. Chen H, Duffy S, Tabar L. A Markov chain method to estimate the tumour progression rate from preclinical to clinical phase, sensitivity and positive predictive value for mammography in breast cancer screening. The Statistician 1996:307-317. 72. Chen H-H, Yen AM-F, Tab aacute;r L. A Stochastic Model for Calibrating the Survival Benefit of Screen-Detected Cancers. Journal of the American Statistical Association 2012;107:1339-1359. 73. Chen THH, Yen MF, Lai MS, et al. Evaluation of a selective screening for colorectal carcinoma. Cancer 1999;86:1116-1128. 74. Wu GHM, Auvinen A, Yen AMF, Hakama M, Walter SD, Chen HH. A stochastic model for survival of early prostate cancer with adjustments for leadtime, length bias, and over‐detection. Biometrical Journal 2012;54:20-44. 75. Yen AMF, Chen SC, Chang SH, Chen THH. The effect of betel quid and cigarette on multistate progression of oral pre‐malignancy. Journal of oral pathology medicine 2008;37:417-422. 76. Chen THH, Chen CJ, Yen MF, et al. Ultrasound screening and risk factors for death from hepatocellular carcinoma in a high risk group in Taiwan. International journal of cancer 2002;98:257-261. 77. Kay R. A Markov model for analysing cancer markers and disease states in survival studies. Biometrics 1986;42:855-865. 78. Cox DR, Miller HD. The theory of stochastic processes: CRC Press, 1977. 79. Andersen PK, Esbjerg S, S oslash;rensen TI. Multi‐state models for bleeding episodes and mortality in liver cirrhosis. Statistics in Medicine 2000;19:587-599. 80. Cadman D, Chambers L, Feldman W, Sackett D. Assessing the effectiveness of community screening programs. Jama 1984;251:1580-1585. 81. Wimo A, Winblad B, J ouml;nsson L. An estimate of the total worldwide societal costs of dementia in 2005. Alzheimer's Dementia 2007;3:81-91. 82. Wimo A, J ouml;nsson L, Bond J, Prince M, Winblad B. The worldwide economic impact of dementia 2010. Alzheimer's Dementia 2013;9:1-11. e13. 83. 周麗芳;張佳雯;傅中玲;王署君. 探究台灣地區老人失智症經濟成本. 2001; 國立政治大學學報. 84. Dunkin JJ, Anderson-Hanley C. Dementia caregiver burden A review of the literature and guidelines for assessment and intervention. Neurology 1998;51:S53-S60. 85. Chiu L, Tang KY, Liu YH, Shyu WC, Chang TP. Cost comparisons between family‐based care and nursing home care for dementia. Journal of advanced nursing 1999;29:1005-1012. 86. Kuo Y-C, Lan C-F, Chen L-K, Lan VM. Dementia care costs and the patient's quality of life (QoL) in Taiwan: Home versus institutional care services. Archives of gerontology and geriatrics 2010;51:159-163. 87. Chiu L, Tang K-Y, Liu Y-H, Shyu W-C, Chang T-P. Willingness of families caring for victims of dementia to pay for nursing home care: results of a pilot study in Taiwan. Journal of management in medicine 1998;12:349-360. 88. Chan AL, Cham T-M, Lin S-J. Direct medical costs in patients with Alzheimer's disease in Taiwan: A population-based study. Current Therapeutic Research 2009;70:10-18. 89. J ouml;nsson L, Lindgren P, Wimo A, J ouml;nsson B, Winblad B. The cost-effectiveness of donepezil therapy in Swedish patients with Alzheimer's disease: a Markov model. Clinical therapeutics 1999;21:1230-1240. 90. Barker WW, Luis C, Harwood D, et al. The effect of a memory screening program on the early diagnosis of Alzheimer disease. Alzheimer Disease Associated Disorders 2005;19:1-7. 91. Lai SW, Su LT, Lin CH, Tsai CH, Sung FC, Hsieh DP. Polypharmacy increases the risk of Parkinson's disease in older people in Taiwan: a population-based study. Psychogeriatrics : the official journal of the Japanese Psychogeriatric Society 2011;11:150-156. 92. Guy M. McKhann CHP. The diagnosis of dementia due to Alzheimer’s disease:Recommendations from the National Institute on Aging-Alzheimer’sAssociation workgroups on diagnostic guidelines for Alzheimer’s disease. Alzheimer’s Dementia 7 2011;7. 93. Brayne C, Calloway P. The association of education and socioeconomic status with the Mini Mental State Examination and the clinical diagnosis of dementia in elderly people. Age and Ageing 1990;19:91-96. 94. Magaziner J, Bassett SS, Hebel JR. Predicting performance on the Mini-Mental State Examination: use of age-and education-specific equations. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society 1987. 95. Boniol M, Heanue M. Age-standardisation and denominators.Chapter 7. 96. Yu Sun M-JC. A Nationwide Survey of Mild Cognitive Impairment and Dementia, Including Very Mild Dementia, in Taiwan. PLoS One 2014;9 97. Neumann P, Hermann R, Kuntz K, et al. Cost-effectiveness of donepezil in the treatment of mild or moderate Alzheimer’s disease. Neurology 1999;52:1138-1138. 98. TreeAge Software Inc. THfW, version 2012 TSI, Williamstown, Mass, USA. 99. Kukull WA, Higdon R, Bowen JD, et al. Dementia and Alzheimer disease incidence: a prospective cohort study. Archives of neurology 2002;59:1737-1746. 100. Jorm AF, Korten AE, Henderson AS. The prevalence of dementia: a quantitative integration of the literature. Acta Psychiatr Scand 1987;76:465-479. 101. Andersen K, Nielsen H, Lolk A, Andersen J, Becker I, Kragh-S oslash;rensen P. Incidence of very mild to severe dementia and Alzheimer’s disease in Denmark The Odense Study. Neurology 1999;52:85-85. 102. Yoshitake T, Kiyohara Y, Kato I, et al. Incidence and risk factors of vascular dementia and Alzheimer's disease in a defined elderly Japanese population The Hisayama Study. Neurology 1995;45:1161-1168. 103. Fratiglioni L, Viitanen M, von Strauss E, Tontodonati V, Herlitz A, Winblad B. Very Old Women at Highest Risk of Dementia and Alzheimer's Disease Incidence Data from the Kungsholmen Project, Stockholm. Neurology 1997;48:132-138. 104. Di Carlo A, Baldereschi M, Amaducci L, et al. Incidence of dementia, Alzheimer's disease, and vascular dementia in Italy. The ILSA Study. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society 2002;50:41-48. 105. Bermejo-Pareja F, Benito-Le oacute;n J, Vega S, Medrano M, Rom aacute;n G. Incidence and subtypes of dementia in three elderly populations of central Spain. Journal of the neurological sciences 2008;264:63-72. 106. Kukull WA, Higdon R, Bowen JD, et al. Dementia and Alzheimer disease incidence: a prospective cohort study. Archives of neurology 2002;59:1737-1746. 107. Brayne C, Calloway P. An epidemiological study of dementia in a rural population of elderly women. The British Journal of Psychiatry 1989;155:214-219. 108. Mitchell AJ. A meta-analysis of the accuracy of the mini-mental state examination in the detection of dementia and mild cognitive impairment. Journal of psychiatric research 2009;43:411-431. 109. Richard Knafelc DLG, Susan Harrigan, Roslyn Cook, Leon Flicker,Andrew Mackinnon,David Ames. The combination of cognitive testing and an informant questionnaire in screening for dementia Age and Ageing 2003;32:541-547. 110. Xu G MJ, Thornby J, Chowdhury M, Quach M. Screening for mild cognitive impairment (MCI) utilizing combined mini-mental-cognitive capacity examinations for identifying dementia prodromes. Int J Geriatr Psychiatry 2002;17:1027-1033. 111. Mackinnon A, Mulligan R. Combining cognitive testing and informant report to increase accuracy in screening for dementia. American Journal of Psychiatry 1998;155:1529-1535. 112. Manly JJ, Schupf N, Stern Y, Brickman AM, Tang M-X, Mayeux R. Telephone-based identification of mild cognitive impairment and dementia in a multicultural cohort. Archives of neurology 2011;68:607-614. 113. Getsios D, Blume S, Ishak KJ, Maclaine G, Hern aacute;ndez L. An economic evaluation of early assessment for Alzheimer’s disease in the United Kingdom. Alzheimer's Dementia 2012;8:22-30. 114. Jack CR, Lowe VJ, Weigand SD, et al. Serial PIB and MRI in normal, mild cognitive impairment and Alzheimer's disease: implications for sequence of pathological events in Alzheimer's disease. Brain 2009:awp062. 115. Fuh JL, Wang SJ. Cost‐effectiveness analysis of donepezil for mild to moderate Alzheimer's disease in Taiwan. International journal of geriatric psychiatry 2008;23:73-78. 116. Fuh J. Dementia in Taiwan: current status. Tai Wan Lao Nian Yi Xue Ji Lao Nian Xue Za Zhi 2008;3:169-181. 117. Ta-Fu Chen M-JC, Allen GM. Institution Type-Dependent High Prevalence of Dementia in Long-Term Care Units Neuroepidemiology 2007;28:142–149 | |
dc.identifier.uri | http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/4845 | - |
dc.description.abstract | 研究背景 隨著老年人口逐漸增加同時,失智症也有同時增加的趨勢,因此考慮一個符合有效益且有效率的社區型失智症篩檢是非常重要的。在此之前,我們需要一系列的研究,包括流行病學關於失智症早期偵測的認知程度,社區失智症篩檢可行工具的效度,和以社區為基礎的失智症篩檢計畫的經濟評估,及發展出一系列以理論為基礎的統計方法。 研究目的 本論文研究目的有三:(1) 利用一新的估計盛行率/發生率比率為基礎的統計回歸模型,來測量早期偵測,對於失智症發生的平均時間的影響(2)利用一貝氏臨床推理模型,來評估同時合併認知功能檢測(MMSE)及訊息提供問卷(AD8)二種篩檢工具,是否會加社區失智症篩檢診斷的精確度 (3)利用馬可夫決策分析模型,評估社區失智症篩檢中,其不同篩檢模的成本效益分析 研究材料及方法 利用2000-2003年期間,全民健保費用申報的大型資料庫,我們分析出65歲以上有失智症病人,且符合ICD-9-CM 編碼為 290, 290.40, 331.0者,共99,609位。另一資料庫來自2013年社區主動型篩檢,65歲以上參與者共183位。我們收集關於年紀、性別、及就醫地點等相關訊息。利用貝氏方法估出盛行率與發生率比率,來反映一般民眾對於失智症的認知程度。使用貝氏以盛行率/發生率比率為基礎的統計回歸模型,來做盛行率與發生率比率的校正,用此反映對失智症的認知程度。第二部分,在 AD8及MMSE的效度評估研究中,我們針對2013年台南社區整合型篩檢計畫,50歲以上民眾,評估AD8及MMSE二種篩檢工具其單獨使用、或平行檢定、或序列檢定,其效度使否有差異? 利用受試者工作特徵曲線(ROC)來探討 AD8及 MMSE在失智症及輕度認知功能缺損的預測功能。在缺乏黃金診斷標準下,利用一貝氏臨床推理模型來估計不同失智症篩檢工具模式的效度。第三部分,架構一馬可夫決策分析模型,來模擬有做失智症社區篩檢的族群其 10年成本及效益,並比較不同篩檢工具,包括 AD8、MMSE、平行檢定、序列檢定,與無篩檢的族群的成本及效益分析。我們使用一五階段馬可夫模型來模擬失智症進展,利用已發表的國內外文獻所提供參數(轉移機率、各階段所需醫療費用及照顧費用)。效益部分以品質調整人年命 (QALY)來測量,並含3%每年折扣率,並估出增加成本效用比 (ICUR)。利用500次蒙特卡羅模擬,得到從整體社會觀點畫出的分散成本效益面、及接受曲線,此指標可以顯示在不同付費意願閥值下,可以產生符合成本效益的百分比。 結果 失智症盛行率、發生率在健保資料庫(被動性篩檢組)估計值分別為2.91%及1.83%。利用盛行率/發生率比率為基礎的統計回歸模型估計校正區域後,得到, 被動性篩檢中,65歲以上老人盛行率對發生率的比率,男性從在65-79歲族群 1.20(1.15-1,24)到90歲以上族群3,27 (3.13-3.41)。盛行率/發生率比率發現,65歲以上老人盛行率對發生率的比率在地理區域北區最高,東區最低。被動性篩檢組,校正年紀、性別、區域對失智症影響後,發現盛行率對發生率的比率65-79歲族群1.45(1.43-1.47) 到80歲以上族群1.64 (1.61-1.66)。參與社區失智症篩檢組 (主動性篩檢組),發現其盛行率對發生率的比率65-79歲族群4.23(2.68-6.69) 到80歲以上族群4.77 (3.02-7.54)。 AD8單獨使用對失智症敏感度及特異度分別為64.71% 及87.89%,MMSE單獨使用在校正教育程度的情況,對失智症敏感度及特異度分別為41.18% 及84.50% 。兩種篩檢工具合併使用,平行檢定的敏感度及特異度分別為88.89% 及70.16% ,序列檢定的敏感度及特異度分別為50% 及93.02%。AD8單獨使用對失智症+輕度認知功能障礙,敏感度及特異度分別為25.74% 及90.70%。所有篩檢模式,對於輕度認知功能障礙的敏感度,除了切點切在26分以外 ,其他組模式皆顯示敏感度較差,特異度尚可。利用受試者工作特曲線(ROC)來探討 AD8及 MMSE在失智症及輕度認知功能缺損的預測功能。結果發現合併 AD8和MMSE (平行檢定組)的 曲線下面積(AUC)為 82.3% (75.1%-89.4%)產生比AD8 (AUC=73.3% (60.7%-85.9%))單獨使用或 MMSE (AUC=77.4 %( 67.6%-87.3%)單獨使用或系列檢定(AUC= 67.6% (53.4%-81.8%))更好的預測功能。利用貝氏分析方法,可得到平行檢定提高敏感度(97.2%)相較於 MMSE (82.2%)或 AD8單獨使用(84.1%):序列檢定提高特異度度(96.8 %) 相較於 MMSE (86.1%)或 AD8 (77.1%)單獨使用。關於經濟評估結果如下:只考慮篩檢及醫療支出的直接成本,則成本效用比 (ICUR)在AD8、MMSE、平行檢定、序列檢定中分別為每一人年為美金401.4、457.7、409.8、499.2元。同時考慮間接成本,在分散成本效益面評估為大約80%的模擬值在第四象限(顯性)。由四種篩檢模式中可知,如果政府願意付費閥值到達美金20000元,則可以得到88-94%成本效益。如果,只考直接成本,評估為大約40%的模擬值在第四象限(顯性),當願意付費閥值到達美金20000元,則可以得到93-99%成本效益。 結論 從預防由失智症造成失能和死亡的臨床方面來看,我們的研究,藉由根據所估計盛行率/發生率比率在社區篩檢模式(主動性偵測) 相較於健保照護體系(被動性偵測) 較高,已證實在一般健保照護體系,失智症的認知程度偏低。合併使用AD8和 MMSE在社區失智症篩檢,可提高工具敏感度。最後,使用AD8和 MMSE在社區失智症篩檢 是符合成本效益的:相較於無篩檢組幾乎接近省錢的。最符合成本效益的是合併使用AD8和 MMSE的平行檢定模式。我們的研究結果可應用於健康照護政策評估,及其他有興趣於發展社區失智症篩檢的計畫,進而減少失智症照護的支出。從方法學的角度,我們發展出三種創新方法,包括(1) 估計盛行率/發生率比率為基礎的統計回歸模型。(2) 利用貝氏臨床推理模型來估計不同失智症篩檢工具模式的效度。 (3) 馬可夫決策分析模型,評估社區失智症篩檢中結合AD8和 MMSE 的成本效益分析。 | zh_TW |
dc.description.abstract | Background As there is an increasing trend in the morbidity of dementia when aging population has been increasing, considering an effective and efficient community based dementia screening programs is of paramount important. Before doing so a series of studies would be required to embrace various aspects including epidemiological assessment related to awareness of early detection of dementia, the validity of feasible screening tool for community-based screening for dementia, and economic evaluation of community-based screening program with the development of a series of theoretically-sound statistical methods. Aims This thesis aimed to (1) quantify the impact of early detection related to awareness on the average duration of disease based on the measurement of the ratio of prevalence to incidence of dementia with a newly proposed P/I-ratio-based statistical regression model; (2) assess the validity of the accuracy of the early detection of dementia with cognitive test (MMSE) and informant questionnaire (AD8) alone and particularly in the combination applied to a community-based dementia screening with Bayesian clinical reasoning model; and (3) perform cost-effectiveness of community-based dementia screening program with various screening strategies proposed in the second aim with the Markov decision tree model. Materials and Methods By using a large-scale, claimed data of the National Health Insurance (NHI) database between 2000 and 2003 in Taiwan, we identified 99,609 patients age over 65 years with dementia (ICD-9-CM code 290, 290.40, and 331.0). The other data source included a total of 183 subjects aged over 65 years participating in an active dementia survey conducted in 2013. Information on age, gender, and geographic areas were also collected. Bayesian P/I-ratio-based statistical regression method was used to estimate the adjusted prevalence/incidence (P/I) ratios of dementia to reflect the awareness of dementia. For the validity of AD8 and MMSE as well as the combination of the two tools in the parallel and the serial mode, we applied the two screening tools simultaneously in a community-based screening program for dementia to 282 Tainan residents aged over 50 years in 2013. Receiver operating characteristic curves (ROC) were applied to explore the performance of different screen modalities for prediction of MCI or dementia. Bayesian clinical reasoning method was used to estimate the performance of screening modalities in the absence of golden-standard diagnosis. The Markov decision analysis was conducted to investigate the cost-utility of community-based screening of dementia over a 10-year period to compare different screening tools (AD8, MMSE, parallel and serial test of the two) with no screening. We used a five-state Markov model to simulate the progression of dementia. Disease transition probabilities and costs of different stages were extracted from literatures. The main outcome measure was cost per quality-adjusted life-year gained with a 3% annual discount rate. The scattered cost-effectiveness plane (CE plane) and acceptability curve are presented given a 500 Monte Carlo simulated samples. Results The prevalence and incidence rate of dementia based on passive survey were estimated as 2.91% and 1.83 %, respectively. The results with the application of Bayesian P/I-ratio-based statistical regression model show the adjusted P/I ratio increased from 1.20 (1.15-1.24) for 70-74 age group to 3.27 (3.13-3.41) for 90+ age group in males. The P/I ratio was the highest in northern area the lowest in eastern area. After controlling for age, gender, and geographic area, the adjusted P/I ratio increased from 1.45 (1.43-1.47) for 65-79 age group to1.64 (1.61-1.66) for 80+ age group through passive detection method (health insurance system). The corresponding figures increased from 4.23 (2.68-6.69) for 65-79 age group to 4.77 (3.02-7.54) for 80+ age group in active community-based survey. The sensitivity and specificity of the sole use of AD8 in dementia screening were 64.71% and 87.89%. The sensitivity and specificity of the sole use of MMSE in dementia with adjustment for education level were 41.18% and 84.50%. The combination of AD8 with MMSE in parallel mode yielded 88.89% of sensitivity and 70.16% of specificity. The combination of AD8 with MMSE in serial mode yielded 50.00% of sensitivity and 93.02% of specificity. The estimates of sensitivity and specificity of using AD8 test alone for MCI plus dementia were 25.74% and 90.70%. All the estimates of sensitivity for all the modes except the MMSE with 26 of cutoff for detecting MCI were poor and the specificity was moderate. By combining prior information derived from the results of previous studies with Bayesian approach, the results show the parallel mode had higher sensitivity (97.2%) than either MMSE (82.2%) or AD8 (84.1%) alone . Besides, the serial test had higher specificity (96.8 %) than AD8 (77.1%) or MMSE (86.1%) alone. ROC curve showed that the combination of MMSE and AD8 in the parallel mode (AUC=82.3% (75.1%-89.4%)) produced a more accurate prediction of dementia than the use of AD8 (AUC=73.3% (60.7%-85.9%)) and MMSE (AUC=77.4 %( 67.6%-87.3%) alone and also the serial mode (AUC= 67.6% (53.4%-81.8%)). Regarding economic evaluation, if only direct cost on screening and medical expenditure were considered, the ICURs for AD8, MMSE, parallel test, and sequential test were $401.4, $457.7, $409.8, and $499.2 per QALY gained, respectively. The scatted CE plane suggested that around 80% simulated sit in fourth quadrant (dominant) when indirect cost was considered. The probability of being cost-effective was 88-94% given willingness-to-pay (WTP) at $20,000 for the four screening scenario. The corresponding figures for being dominant and cost-effective at WTP at $20,000 when only direct cost taking into account were 40% and 93-99%, respectively. Conclusions From the practical aspect of prevention of disability and death from dementia, low awareness of dementia has been ascertained in routine health insurance health care system as the P/I ratio of community-based survey (active detection method) was greater than that of health insurance heath care system (passive detection method). The combination tests of MMSE and AD8 could improve diagnostic accuracy in the community dementia screening. Community-based screening for dementia with AD8 and MMSE is more cost-effective and almost near cost-saving compared with no screening program. The most economic screening strategy is the parallel mode of combining AD8 with MMSE in comparison with other modes. From the methodological viewpoint, there are three novelties of the methodological development here, including a P/I-ratio-based regression model, the application of Bayesian model for multiple detection modalities, and the development Markov cycle decision tree model for economic evaluation of population-based screening program with AD8 in combination with MMSE. The empirical data together with the development of theoretically-sound statistical method provides a new insight into how to conduct an effective and efficient community-based screening for dementia. | en |
dc.description.provenance | Made available in DSpace on 2021-05-14T17:48:36Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 ntu-104-D99849020-1.pdf: 8310141 bytes, checksum: aa5799a66fc8f950dac47a1b6175e005 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2015 | en |
dc.description.tableofcontents | 致謝 i 中文摘要 ii Abstract v Contents viii Table contents xi Figure contents xiii Chapter 1:Introduction 1 1.1 Background 1 1.1.1 Disease Burden and Social Significance 1 1.1.2 Implications and usefulness of epidemiological profiles of Alzheimer’s disease and dementia 2 1.1.3 Screening of dementia 4 1.1.4 Cost-effectiveness analysis of screening for dementia 7 1.2 Aims 8 Chapter 2:Literature Review 10 2.1 Epidemiology of dementia 10 2.1.1 Prevalence and incidence of dementia 10 2.1.2 Risk factor of dementia 11 2.2 Types of Dementia 13 2.2.1 Progressive dementias 13 2.2.2 Reversed type of dementia 15 2.3 Common cause of dementia 18 2.4 Diagnosis of dementia and MCI 18 2.5 Early detection of dementia 20 2.5.1 Instruments of neuropsychological measurements in dementia screening 20 2.5.1.1 Cognitive test: Mini-Mental Status Examination (MMSE) 20 2.5.1.2 The informant-based tests:AD8 Questionnaires 22 2.5.2 Accuracy and reliability of early detection instruments in dementia 22 2.5.3 The benefit of early detection in dementia 25 2.6 Cost-effectiveness analysis of dementia 29 2.6.1 Multi-state Markov models 29 2.6.2 Decision analysis of dementia 35 2.6.3 Empirical results of cost-effectiveness analysis of dementia 39 Chapter 3: Materials and Methods 41 3.1 Study samples and design 41 3.1.1 Part I: Epidemiology of dementia in Taiwan 41 3.1.2 Part II:Combination MMSE and Ad8 tests in community-based Screening for dementia 43 3.1.3 Part III: Cost-Effectiveness of community-based dementia screening 48 3.2 Methodology 49 3.2.1 Part I: Epidemiology of dementia in Taiwan 49 3.2.1.1 Prevalence and Incidence calculation 49 3.2.1.2 Age-standardized incidence rate of dementia 50 3.2.1.3 The effect of risk factors on the incidence of dementia with Poisson regression model 50 3.2.1.4 The Prevalence/Incidence (P/I) ratio 51 3.2.2 Part II: Performance of MMSE an AD8 53 3.2.2.1 The correlation between MMSE and AD8 and the correlation between tests and dementia 53 3.2.2.2 Bayesian method for Sensitivity, Specificity of MSME and AD8 53 3.2.2.3 Logistic regression analysis 53 3.2.2.4 Receiver operating characteristic curve 54 3.2.2.5 Bayesian estimation of disease prevalence and the parameters of diagnostic tests 55 3.2.2.6 Bayesian theorem for clinical reasoning 56 3.2.2.7 Bayesian estimation for early detection test in the absence of golden-standard diagnosis 57 3.2.3 Part III: Cost-effectiveness analysis of community-based dementia screening 61 3.2.3.1 Decision tree with Markov decision model 61 3.2.3.2 Parameters assigned in Markov decision model 63 3.2.3.3 Probability cost-utility analysis 64 Chapter 4:Result 66 4.1 Prevalence and incidence of dementia in population-based cohort study 66 4.1.1 Age-specific and gender-specific prevalence, incidence rate 66 4.1.2 Poisson regression model 67 4.1.3 Prevalence/incidence ratio 67 4.1.4 Comparison other study on age-standardized incidence rate 69 4.2 Performance of MMSE and AD8 in community-based study 69 4.2.1 Baseline characteristics 69 4.2.2 The correlation between MMSE and ADB and the correlations 71 4.2.3 Sensitivity and specificity of MMSE and AD8 71 4.2.4 Bayesian estimation of the validity of screening with MMSE and AD8 74 4.2.5 Logistic regression analysis 76 4.2.6 ROC curve of MMSE and AD8 76 4.3 The cost-utility of community-based dementia screening 77 4.3.1 Simulated results of disease outcome 77 4.3.2 Base case results of the cost-utility analysis 78 4.3.3 Probabilistic cost-utility analysis 79 Chapter 5: Discussion 82 5.1 Summary of main findings and contributions 82 5.2 Applications 84 5.2.1 Epidemiological assessment of dementia in Taiwan 84 5.2.2 The validity of the accuracy of MMSE and AD8 in detecting dementia 87 5.2.3 Cost- effectiveness analysis of community-based dementia screening 93 5.3 Methodological development 96 5.3.1 The P/I-ratio-based regression model 96 5.3.2 Meta-analysis with Bayesian estimation 96 5.3.3 Probability cost-effectiveness analysis 97 5.4. Limitations 98 5.4.1 The P/I ratio study 98 5.4.2 Limitation of community-based dementia screening 99 5.4.3 Limitation of cost-effectiveness analysis 99 5.5 Conclusion 100 References 138 | |
dc.language.iso | en | |
dc.title | 失智症早期篩檢偵測工具效度及成本效益之統計評估 | zh_TW |
dc.title | Statistical Evaluation of Validity and Cost-effectiveness of Two Screening Tools for Early Detection of Dementia | en |
dc.type | Thesis | |
dc.date.schoolyear | 103-1 | |
dc.description.degree | 博士 | |
dc.contributor.coadvisor | 陳秀熙(Hsiu-Hsi Chen) | |
dc.contributor.oralexamcommittee | 許維志(Wei-Chih Hsu),程蘊菁(Yen-Ching Chen),嚴明芳(Ming-Fang Yen),潘信良(Shin-Liang Pan) | |
dc.subject.keyword | 失智症,篩檢,敏感度,特異度,成本效益, | zh_TW |
dc.subject.keyword | dementia,screening,sensitivity,specificity,cost-effectiveness, | en |
dc.relation.page | 146 | |
dc.rights.note | 同意授權(全球公開) | |
dc.date.accepted | 2015-02-03 | |
dc.contributor.author-college | 公共衛生學院 | zh_TW |
dc.contributor.author-dept | 流行病學與預防醫學研究所 | zh_TW |
顯示於系所單位: | 流行病學與預防醫學研究所 |
文件中的檔案:
檔案 | 大小 | 格式 | |
---|---|---|---|
ntu-104-1.pdf | 8.12 MB | Adobe PDF | 檢視/開啟 |
系統中的文件,除了特別指名其著作權條款之外,均受到著作權保護,並且保留所有的權利。