The Brief Assessment of Cognition for Schizophrenia: Validity and - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

The Brief Assessment of Cognition for Schizophrenia: Validity and Reliability of the Filipino Version

INTRODUCTION

METHODS AND PROCEDURES

Subject Selection/Population/Sam pling Inclusion Criteria  30 patients not less than 2 years and not more than 5 years, literate  stable in terms of symptoms  30 non-clinical respondents who are of sound cognitive  function were also gathered.

Subject Selection/Population/Sa mpling  Exclusion Criteria  Respondents who are suffering from any neurological, substance abuse, or mental retardation are not included in the study.

Conduct of the Study

Preparation Phase Transaction Letter addressed to R. Keefe Agreement, Ethics Review Licensure, Shipment Lay-outing, Translation Editing

Translation of the Manual Forward- Translation Back Translation Lay-out, (Commission of (Individual Editing the Filipino Translator) Language) 1 and a half 2 weeks 6 months months

Informed Consent Ethics Approval and Consent Form Review (Mariveles Mental (Clinical and Hospital) (EAC) Controlled Group)

Phase III. Data Gathering Clinical Control Initial Meeting with Initial Meeting for consent LAR for Consent and reschedule for test B 1 session 2 sessions (Test A & B) 1 week testing interval

Analysis of Data  Discriminant Analysis (Validity)  Reliability (Internal Consistency; Crohn Bach’s Alpha)  Reliability (Test-retest)

Statistical Tool  The system used was IBM SSPS version 20.  Cronbach’s Alpha: Internal Consistency  Reliability was also measured through test-retest.  Discriminant Analysis: Validity

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Table 1. Cronbach’s Alpha (Internal Consistency) Reliability Statistics Cronbach’s N of items Alpha .776 7

Table 1.1. Item-Total Statistics Scale Mean Scale Variance Corrected Item Cronbach’s if item if item deleted total Alpha if item deleted correlation deleted Clinical Verbal 97.90 3276.093 .672 .774 Memory Clinical Digit 93.30 2952.493 .831 .737 Sequencing Clinical Token 50.30 1145.114 .779 .844 Motor Task Clinical Category 93.50 2883.017 .640 .739 Instances Clinical Oral Word 97.80 3131.062 .733 .758 Association Task Clinical Symbol 87.23 2392.530 .723 .699 Coding Clinical Tower of 95.37 2891.482 .809 .731 London

Table 2. Summary of Test-Restest Reliability r p Subtest Verbal Memory r =.614 p =<.05 Digit Sequencing r =.505 p =<.05 Token Motor r =.581 p =<.05 Task r =.512 p =<.05 Category Instances r =.407 p =<.05 Word Association r =.671 p =<.05 Symbol Coding r =.788 p =<.05 Tower of London

Table 3. Discriminant Analysis/ Validity Subtest t Sig value Mean Difference Verbal Memory -9.109 .000 -6.233 Digit Sequencing -9.245 .000 -11.867 Token Motor -6.549 .000 -36.900 Task Category -5.862 .000 -9.733 Instances Word -7.609 .000 -8.300 Association Symbol Coding -13.811 .000 -43.433 Tower of London -6.506 .000 -8.567  Results show that in all subtest, there is a significant difference between control group and clinical group making the BACS-F statistically valid.

CONCLUSION & RECOMMENDATION

 Overall, the BACS-F is an easy, portalble, and effective tool for evaluating the cognitive function of patients with Schizophrenia.  The study shows that the BACS-F is a highly valid and reliable tool.

Future Work on BACS-F  Increase sample size.  Match demographics of clinical and controlled respondents.  Conduct a test-retest reliability on the same clinical group.  Develop sets of manuals through translation into different dialects.

References:  Kaneda et al; (2007), Brief Assessment of Cognition in Schizophrenia: Validation of the Japanese Version ; Psychiatry and Clinical Neurosciences Journal , 61, 602 – 609 doi:10.1111/j.1440- 1819.2007.01725.x R.S.E. Keefe et al. / Schizophrenia Research 68 (2004) 283 – 297;  Elsevier Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (2013);  5 th Ed., American Psychiatric Publishing, Washington DC J. Cooper-Kahn (2015); What is Executive Function; Ldonline;  National Joint Committee on Learning Disabilities (NJCLD); Washington DC McLeod (2012), Working Memory Model; Simply Psychology 