Methods for assessment of rey auditory verbal learning test performance in memory clinic patients and healthy adults - at the cross-roads of learning theory and clinical utility.
Ove Almkvist, Anna Rennie, Eric Westman, John Wallert, Urban Ekman
{"title":"Methods for assessment of rey auditory verbal learning test performance in memory clinic patients and healthy adults - at the cross-roads of learning theory and clinical utility.","authors":"Ove Almkvist, Anna Rennie, Eric Westman, John Wallert, Urban Ekman","doi":"10.1080/13854046.2024.2384616","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Background:</b> Knowledge is still lacking regarding the preferred method for evaluation of learning in the Rey Auditory Verbal Learning Test (RAVLT). Validity of different methods was examined by the effect size in differentiating diagnostic stages in memory clinic patients versus healthy adults and the strength of association between RAVLT performance and brain atrophy. <b>Method:</b> The study included individuals with dementia (<i>n</i> = 247), Mild Cognitive Impairment (MCI, <i>n</i> = 709), Subjective Cognitive Impairment (SCI, <i>n</i> = 175) and cognitively unimpaired adults serving as healthy controls (HC, <i>n</i> = 102). All patients went through a comprehensive clinical examination and neuropsychological assessment of cognition including episodic memory gauged with RAVLT and brain imaging of medial temporal atrophy, cortical atrophy, and white matter hyperintensity. <b>Results:</b> The standard method for evaluation of learning in RAVLT (summed score over five trials) together with the late learning method (mean of trials 4 and 5) were the two most powerful methods according to group differentiation (discriminant validity). Both methods also showed considerable association with medial temporal atrophy (construct validity). The initial RAVLT performance represented by results on trial 1 and the constant in regression analysis with the power function provided information regarding attention that was important for the separation of SCI and HC. <b>Conclusions:</b> The most favorable clinical utility was indicated by discriminant and construct validity by total learning (standard method) including both attention- and learning-related parts and late learning of RAVLT performance, while theoretical understanding of mental processes involved in RAVLT performance was provided by the distinction between initial versus the subsequent learning performance.</p>","PeriodicalId":55250,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Neuropsychologist","volume":" ","pages":"1-15"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical Neuropsychologist","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13854046.2024.2384616","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: Knowledge is still lacking regarding the preferred method for evaluation of learning in the Rey Auditory Verbal Learning Test (RAVLT). Validity of different methods was examined by the effect size in differentiating diagnostic stages in memory clinic patients versus healthy adults and the strength of association between RAVLT performance and brain atrophy. Method: The study included individuals with dementia (n = 247), Mild Cognitive Impairment (MCI, n = 709), Subjective Cognitive Impairment (SCI, n = 175) and cognitively unimpaired adults serving as healthy controls (HC, n = 102). All patients went through a comprehensive clinical examination and neuropsychological assessment of cognition including episodic memory gauged with RAVLT and brain imaging of medial temporal atrophy, cortical atrophy, and white matter hyperintensity. Results: The standard method for evaluation of learning in RAVLT (summed score over five trials) together with the late learning method (mean of trials 4 and 5) were the two most powerful methods according to group differentiation (discriminant validity). Both methods also showed considerable association with medial temporal atrophy (construct validity). The initial RAVLT performance represented by results on trial 1 and the constant in regression analysis with the power function provided information regarding attention that was important for the separation of SCI and HC. Conclusions: The most favorable clinical utility was indicated by discriminant and construct validity by total learning (standard method) including both attention- and learning-related parts and late learning of RAVLT performance, while theoretical understanding of mental processes involved in RAVLT performance was provided by the distinction between initial versus the subsequent learning performance.
期刊介绍:
The Clinical Neuropsychologist (TCN) serves as the premier forum for (1) state-of-the-art clinically-relevant scientific research, (2) in-depth professional discussions of matters germane to evidence-based practice, and (3) clinical case studies in neuropsychology. Of particular interest are papers that can make definitive statements about a given topic (thereby having implications for the standards of clinical practice) and those with the potential to expand today’s clinical frontiers. Research on all age groups, and on both clinical and normal populations, is considered.