To examine the equivalency of ECAS versions A, B, and C in an Irish cohort, and to examine potential practice effects, 236 healthy controls were recruited through the Irish ALS control database. One hundred and seventy-six (176) controls completed ECAS version A, B, or C. Separately, 60 controls completed all three versions (A-B-C), consecutively, four months apart. TOST analysis found that ECAS A was equivalent to ECAS B and C. ECAS B and C were not statistically equivalent, however the difference between them was minimal. Participants showed improvement in ECAS performance over time, indicative of practice effects. Significant improvement was observed from time 1 to 2, but not from time 2 to 3. We propose Irish specific reliable change index (RCI) scores that take into consideration practice effects and measurement error. These thresholds will help quantify clinically meaningful cognitive decline in ALS patients, leading to improved quality of care.

中文翻译：

---

爱丁堡认知与行为ALS屏幕（ECAS）替代版本的等效性和实践效果。

为了检查爱尔兰人群中ECAS版本A，B和C的等效性，并检查潜在的实践效果，通过爱尔兰ALS对照数据库招募了236名健康对照。一百七十六（176）个控件完成了ECAS版本A，B或C。另外，有60个控件连续四个月分别完成了所有三个版本（ABC）。TOST分析发现，ECAS A等效于ECAS B和C。ECASB和C在统计上不相等，但是它们之间的差异很小。参与者显示，随着时间的推移，ECAS表现有所改善，表明了实践效果。从时间1到2观察到显着改善，但从时间2到3没有观察到。我们建议考虑实践影响和测量误差的爱尔兰特定可靠变化指数（RCI）分数。