Utility of a Short-Form Phonemic Fluency Task.

IF 2.1 4区心理学 Q2 PSYCHOLOGY Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology Pub Date : 2024-08-24 DOI:10.1093/arclin/acae022

Jack R Kaufman, Hudaisa Fatima, Laura H Lacritz, C Munro Cullum

{"title":"Utility of a Short-Form Phonemic Fluency Task.","authors":"Jack R Kaufman, Hudaisa Fatima, Laura H Lacritz, C Munro Cullum","doi":"10.1093/arclin/acae022","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objective: to establish a proof-of-concept and ascertain the reliability of an abbreviated 30-second (30s) phonemic fluency measure as a cognitive screening tool in older adults.Methods: in all, 201 English-speaking individuals with normal cognition (NC; n = 119) or cognitive impairment (CI; mild CI or dementia; n = 82) were administered a standard 60s phonemic fluency task (FAS/CFL) with discrete 30s intervals denoted.Results: for all letters, 30s trial scores significantly predicted 60s scores for the same letter, R2 = .7-.9, F(1, 200) = 850-915, p < .001. As with 60s total scores, 30s cumulative scores (for all three trials) were significantly different between NC and CI groups (p < .001). Receiver operating characteristic analyses showed that 30s total scores distinguished NC and CI groups as effectively (AUC = .675) as 60s total scores (AUC = .658).Conclusions: these findings support the utility and reliability of a short-form phonemic fluency paradigm, as 30s performance reliably predicted 60s/trial totals and was equally accurate in distinguishing impaired/non-impaired groups.","PeriodicalId":8176,"journal":{"name":"Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology","volume":" ","pages":"770-774"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11345109/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/arclin/acae022","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: to establish a proof-of-concept and ascertain the reliability of an abbreviated 30-second (30s) phonemic fluency measure as a cognitive screening tool in older adults.

Methods: in all, 201 English-speaking individuals with normal cognition (NC; n = 119) or cognitive impairment (CI; mild CI or dementia; n = 82) were administered a standard 60s phonemic fluency task (FAS/CFL) with discrete 30s intervals denoted.

Results: for all letters, 30s trial scores significantly predicted 60s scores for the same letter, R2 = .7-.9, F(1, 200) = 850-915, p < .001. As with 60s total scores, 30s cumulative scores (for all three trials) were significantly different between NC and CI groups (p < .001). Receiver operating characteristic analyses showed that 30s total scores distinguished NC and CI groups as effectively (AUC = .675) as 60s total scores (AUC = .658).

Conclusions: these findings support the utility and reliability of a short-form phonemic fluency paradigm, as 30s performance reliably predicted 60s/trial totals and was equally accurate in distinguishing impaired/non-impaired groups.

查看原文

微信好友朋友圈 QQ好友复制链接

本刊更多论文

短式语音流利性任务的实用性。

方法：对 201 名认知正常（NC；n = 119）或认知障碍（CI；轻度 CI 或痴呆；n = 82）的讲英语者进行标准 60 秒语音流利性任务（FAS/CFL），并标出离散的 30 秒间隔。结果：对于所有字母，30s 的试验得分可显著预测同一字母 60s 的得分，R2 = .7-.9, F(1, 200) = 850-915, p 结论：这些研究结果支持短式语音流利性范式的实用性和可靠性，因为 30s 的表现可可靠地预测 60s/ 试验的总分，并且在区分受损组/非受损组方面同样准确。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文去求助

来源期刊

Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology 医学-心理学

CiteScore

4.60

自引率

7.70%

发文量

358

审稿时长

6-12 weeks

期刊介绍： The journal publishes original contributions dealing with psychological aspects of the etiology, diagnosis, and treatment of disorders arising out of dysfunction of the central nervous system. Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology will also consider manuscripts involving the established principles of the profession of neuropsychology: (a) delivery and evaluation of services, (b) ethical and legal issues, and (c) approaches to education and training. Preference will be given to empirical reports and key reviews. Brief research reports, case studies, and commentaries on published articles (not exceeding two printed pages) will also be considered. At the discretion of the editor, rebuttals to commentaries may be invited. Occasional papers of a theoretical nature will be considered.