Examining \u3cem\u3eDSM\u3c/em\u3e Criteria for Trichotillomania in A Dimensional Framework: Implications for \u3cem\u3eDSM-5\u3c/em\u3e And Diagnostic Practice

Background: Diagnosis of Trichotillomania (TTM) requires meeting several criteria that aim to embody the core pathology of the disorder. These criteria are traditionally interpreted monothetically, in that they are all equally necessary for diagnosis. Alternatively, a dimensional conceptualization of psychopathology allows for examination of the relatedness of each criterion to the TTM latent continuum. Objectives: First, to examine the ability of recently removed criteria (B and C) to identify the latent dimensions of TTM psychopathology, such that they discriminate between individuals with low and high degrees of hair pulling severity. Second, to determine the impact of removing criteria B and C on the information content of remaining diagnostic criteria. Third, to determine the psychometric properties of remaining TTM diagnostic criteria that remain largely unchanged in DSM-5; that is, whether they measure distinct or overlapping levels of TTM psychopathology. Fourth, to determine whether information content derived from diagnostic criteria aid in the prediction of disease trajectory (i.e., can relapse propensity be predicted from criteria endorsement patterns). Method: Statistics derived from Item Response Theory were used to examine diagnostic criteria endorsement in 91 adults with TTM who underwent psychotherapy. Results: The removal of two criteria in DSM-5 and psychometric validity of remaining criteria was supported. Additionally, individual trait parameters were used to predict treatment progress, uncovering predictive power where none previously existed. Conclusions: Diagnostic criteria for TTM should be examined in dimensional models, which allow for nuanced and sensitive measurement of core symptomology in treatment contexts

The association between preoperative spinal cord rotation and postoperative C5 nerve palsy

BACKGROUND: C5 nerve palsy is a known complication of cervical spine surgery. The development and etiology of this complication are not completely understood. The purpose of the present study was to determine whether rotation of the cervical spinal cord predicts the development of a C5 palsy. METHODS: We performed a retrospective review of prospectively collected spine registry data as well as magnetic resonance images. We reviewed the records for 176 patients with degenerative disorders of the cervical spine who underwent anterior cervical decompression or corpectomy within the C4 to C6 levels. Our measurements included area for the spinal cord, space available for the cord, and rotation of the cord with respect to the vertebral body. RESULTS: There was a 6.8% prevalence of postoperative C5 nerve palsy as defined by deltoid motor strength of /= 11 degrees ) and palsy (point-biserial correlation = 0.94; p \u3c 0.001). A diagnostic criterion of 6 degrees of rotation could identify patients who had a C5 palsy (sensitivity = 1.00 [95% confidence interval, 0.70 to 1.00], specificity = 0.97 [95% confidence interval, 0.93 to 0.99], positive predictive value = 0.71 [95% confidence interval, 0.44 to 0.89], negative predictive value = 1.00 [95% confidence interval, 0.97 to 1.00]). CONCLUSIONS: Our evidence suggests that spinal cord rotation is a strong and significant predictor of C5 palsy postoperatively. Patients can be classified into three types, with Type 1 representing mild rotation (0 degrees to 5 degrees ), Type 2 representing moderate rotation (6 degrees to 10 degrees ), and Type 3 representing severe rotation (\u3e/= 11 degrees ). The rate of C5 palsy was zero of 159 in the Type-1 group, eight of thirteen in the Type-2 group, and four of four in the Type-3 group. This information may be valuable for surgeons and patients considering anterior surgery in the C4 to C6 levels

Item response theory analysis of cognitive tests in people with dementia:a systematic review

BACKGROUND: Performance on psychometric tests is key to diagnosis and monitoring treatment of dementia. Results are often reported as a total score, but there is additional information in individual items of tests which vary in their difficulty and discriminatory value. Item difficulty refers to an ability level at which the probability of responding correctly is 50%. Discrimination is an index of how well an item can differentiate between patients of varying levels of severity. Item response theory (IRT) analysis can use this information to examine and refine measures of cognitive functioning. This systematic review aimed to identify all published literature which had applied IRT to instruments assessing global cognitive function in people with dementia. METHODS: A systematic review was carried out across Medline, Embase, PsychInfo and CINHAL articles. Search terms relating to IRT and dementia were combined to find all IRT analyses of global functioning scales of dementia. RESULTS: Of 384 articles identified four studies met inclusion criteria including a total of 2,920 people with dementia from six centers in two countries. These studies used three cognitive tests (MMSE, ADAS-Cog, BIMCT) and three IRT methods (Item Characteristic Curve analysis, Samejima’s graded response model, the 2-Parameter Model). Memory items were most difficult. Naming the date in the MMSE and memory items, specifically word recall, of the ADAS-cog were most discriminatory. CONCLUSIONS: Four published studies were identified which used IRT on global cognitive tests in people with dementia. This technique increased the interpretative power of the cognitive scales, and could be used to provide clinicians with key items from a larger test battery which would have high predictive value. There is need for further studies using IRT in a wider range of tests involving people with dementia of different etiology and severity

Dementia Staging across Three Different Methods

Background/Aims: To investigate the effectiveness of an item response theory (IRT)-based approach to staging dementia. Methods: IRT estimates of dementia severity in 1,485 patients were used to stage dementia and then compared to dementia staging using the classic Clinical Dementia Rating Scale (CDR) algorithm and the Sum of the Boxes (SOB) approach. Results: Measurement imprecision was highest when dementia stages were determined based on the classic algorithm (48% of sample), lower when they were determined based on the SOB approach (12%), and lowest when determined using IRT-based staging (0%). Conclusion: The classic CDR algorithm weights boxes largely according to clinical experience. The SOB approach weights all boxes equally. The IRT approach weights boxes according to their actual ability to identify dementia severity and therefore provides the most precise information for staging dementia