Introduction

Numerous tests of visuo-spatial neglect (VSN) have been developed. In this study, we propose a clustering of VSN tests by making a distinction between static tests with low levels of cognitive demand (i.e. tests without movement or time-restrictions, such as paper-and-pencil tests) and dynamic tests with high levels of cognitive demand (i.e. tests incorporating movement and time-restrictions, such as virtual reality tests). The concepts of static and dynamic tests have not been systematically investigated so far. Here, we investigated (1) whether we would find dissociations between patients showing VSN on test within the static cluster but not on tests within the dynamic cluster, and vice versa; (2) whether differences in demographic or clinical characteristics could be identified between these groups of patients; and (3) whether the underlying factor structure would correspond to our proposed distinction between static and dynamic clusters of tests.

Method

Sixty-one patients with VSN completed three static tests (shape cancellation, line bisection, letter cancellation) and three dynamic tests (Catherine Bergego Scale, Mobility Assessment Course, simulated driving test).

Results

Thirteen percent of patients showed VSN on tests within the static cluster, 33% on tests within the dynamic cluster, and 54% on tests within both clusters. Patients with VSN on the dynamic tests (alone or in addition to static tests) had poorer motor function, poorer walking abilities and were more dependent in daily life than patients showing VSN on the static cluster alone. The underlying factor structure corresponded to our proposed conceptual distinction between static and dynamic clusters of tests.

Conclusions

Static and dynamic tests compose different clusters and double dissociations are shown between clusters. Future research involving data-driven approaches might result in a better understanding on how different tests of VSN relate to each other, and, more importantly, a better understanding of VSN and its phenotypes.

中文翻译：

---

视觉空间疏忽评估中认知需求的增长：测试静态和动态测试的概念。

介绍

视觉空间疏忽（VSN）的许多测试已经开发出来。在这项研究中，我们通过区分认知需求水平较低的静态测试（即无运动或时间限制的测试，例如纸笔测试）和动态认知水平较高的动态测试，提出了VSN测试的聚类。认知需求（即包含运动和时间限制的测试，例如虚拟现实测试）。到目前为止，尚未对静态和动态测试的概念进行系统的研究。在这里，我们调查了（1）是否可以在静态集群内的测试中发现显示VSN的患者之间分离，而在动态集群内的测试中没有发现VSN的分离，反之亦然；（2）能否在这两组患者之间确定人口统计学或临床特征的差异；

方法

六十一名VSN患者完成了三个静态测试（形状消除，线平分，字母消除）和三个动态测试（凯瑟琳·贝格戈量表，移动性评估课程，模拟驾驶测试）。

结果

13％的患者在静态群集内的测试中显示VSN，在动态群集内的测试中显示33％，在两个群集内的测试中显示54％。与仅在静态集群上显示VSN的患者相比，在动态测试（单独或除静态测试）下接受VSN的患者的运动功能较差，步行能力较差，对日常生活的依赖性更高。潜在的因素结构对应于我们建议的静态和动态测试集群之间的概念区分。

结论

静态和动态测试组成了不同的群集，并且群集之间显示了双重分离。未来涉及数据驱动方法的研究可能会导致人们更好地了解VSN的不同测试之间的相互关系，更重要的是，可以更好地了解VSN及其表型。