Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society最新文献

Objective: Previous studies have found deficits in imaginative elaboration and social inference to be associated with agenesis of the corpus callosum (ACC; Renteria-Vasquez et al., 2022; Turk et al., 2009). In the current study, Thematic Apperception Test (TAT) responses from a neurotypical control group and a group of individuals with ACC were used to further study the capacity for imaginative elaboration and story coherence.

Method: Topic modeling was employed utilizing Latent Diritchlet Allocation to characterize the narrative responses to the pictures used in the TAT. A measure of the difference between models (perplexity) was used to compare the topics of the responses of individual participants to the common core model derived from the responses of the control group. Story coherence was tested using sentence-to-sentence Latent Semantic Analysis.

Results: Group differences in perplexity were statistically significant overall, and for each card individually (p < .001). There were no differences between the groups in story coherence.

Conclusions: TAT narratives from persons with ACC were normally coherent, but more conventional (i.e., more similar to the core text) compared to those of neurotypical controls. Individuals with ACC can make conventional social inferences about socially ambiguous stimuli, but are restricted in their imaginative elaborations, resulting in less topical variability (lower perplexity values) compared to neurotypical controls.

Objective: Normative neuropsychological data are essential for interpretation of test performance in the context of demographic factors. The Mayo Normative Studies (MNS) aim to provide updated normative data for neuropsychological measures administered in the Mayo Clinic Study of Aging (MCSA), a population-based study of aging that randomly samples residents of Olmsted County, Minnesota, from age- and sex-stratified groups. We examined demographic effects on neuropsychological measures and validated the regression-based norms in comparison to existing normative data developed in a similar sample.

Method: The MNS includes cognitively unimpaired adults ≥30 years of age (n = 4,428) participating in the MCSA. Multivariable linear regressions were used to determine demographic effects on test performance. Regression-based normative formulas were developed by first converting raw scores to normalized scaled scores and then regressing on age, age², sex, and education. Total and sex-stratified base rates of low scores (T < 40) were examined in an older adult validation sample and compared with Mayo's Older Americans Normative Studies (MOANS) norms.

Results: Independent linear regressions revealed variable patterns of linear and/or quadratic effects of age (r² = 6-27% variance explained), sex (0-13%), and education (2-10%) across measures. MNS norms improved base rates of low performance in the older adult validation sample overall and in sex-specific patterns relative to MOANS.

Conclusions: Our results demonstrate the need for updated norms that consider complex demographic associations on test performance and that specifically exclude participants with mild cognitive impairment from the normative sample.

Objective: The Neurological Predictor Scale (NPS) quantifies cumulative exposure to tumor- and treatment-related neurological risks. The Pediatric Neuro-Oncology Rating of Treatment Intensity (PNORTI) measures the intensity of different treatment modalities, but research is needed to establish whether it is associated with late effects. This study evaluated the predictive validity of the NPS and PNORTI for neuropsychological outcomes in pediatric brain tumor survivors.

Method: A retrospective chart review was completed of pediatric brain tumor survivors (PBTS) (n = 161, M_age = 13.47, SD = 2.80) who were at least 2 years from the end of tumor-directed treatment. Attention, intellectual functioning, perceptual reasoning, processing speed, verbal reasoning, and working memory were analyzed in relation to the NPS and PNORTI.

Results: NPS scores ranged from 1 to 11 (M = 5.57, SD = 2.27) and PNORTI scores ranged from 1 (n = 101; 62.7%) to 3 (n = 18; 11.2%). When controlling for age, sex, SES factors, and time since treatment, NPS scores significantly predicted intellectual functioning [F(7,149) = 12.86, p < .001, R² = .38] and processing speed [F(7,84) = 5.28, p < .001, R² = .31]. PNORTI scores did not significantly predict neuropsychological outcomes.

Conclusions: The findings suggest that the NPS has value in predicting IF and processing speed above-and-beyond demographic variables. The PNORTI was not associated with neuropsychological outcomes. Future research should consider establishing clinical cutoff scores for the NPS to help determine which survivors are most at risk for neuropsychological late effects and warrant additional assessment.

Objective: Performance validity (PVTs) and symptom validity tests (SVTs) are necessary components of neuropsychological testing to identify suboptimal performances and response bias that may impact diagnosis and treatment. The current study examined the clinical and functional characteristics of veterans who failed PVTs and the relationship between PVT and SVT failures.

Method: Five hundred and sixteen post-9/11 veterans participated in clinical interviews, neuropsychological testing, and several validity measures.

Results: Veterans who failed 2+ PVTs performed significantly worse than veterans who failed one PVT in verbal memory (Cohen's d = .60-.69), processing speed (Cohen's d = .68), working memory (Cohen's d = .98), and visual memory (Cohen's d = .88-1.10). Individuals with 2+ PVT failures had greater posttraumatic stress (PTS; β = 0.16; p = .0002), and worse self-reported depression (β = 0.17; p = .0001), anxiety (β = 0.15; p = .0007), sleep (β = 0.10; p = .0233), and functional outcomes (β = 0.15; p = .0009) compared to veterans who passed PVTs. 7.8% veterans failed the SVT (Validity-10; ≥19 cutoff); Multiple PVT failures were significantly associated with Validity-10 failure at the ≥19 and ≥23 cutoffs (p's < .0012). The Validity-10 had moderate correspondence in predicting 2+ PVTs failures (AUC = 0.83; 95% CI = 0.76, 0.91).

Conclusion: PVT failures are associated with psychiatric factors, but not traumatic brain injury (TBI). PVT failures predict SVT failure and vice versa. Standard care should include SVTs and PVTs in all clinical assessments, not just neuropsychological assessments, particularly in clinically complex populations.

Objective: The present study aimed to develop neuropsychological norms for older Asian Americans with English as a primary or secondary language, using data from the National Alzheimer's Coordinating Center (NACC).

Method: A normative sample of Asian American participants was derived from the NACC database using robust criteria: participants were cognitively unimpaired at baseline (i.e., no MCI or dementia) and remained cognitively unimpaired at 1-year follow-up. Clinical and demographic characteristics were compared between Primary and Secondary English speakers using analyses of variance for continuous measures and chi-square tests for categorical variables. Linear regression models compared neuropsychological performance between the groups, adjusting for demographics (age, sex, and education). Regression models were developed for clinical application to compute demographically adjusted z-scores.

Results: Secondary English speakers were younger than Primary English speakers (p < .001). There were significant differences between the groups on measures of mental status (Mini-Mental State Examination, p = .002), attention (Trail Making Test A, Digit Span Forward Total Score, p <.001), language (Boston Naming Test, Animal Fluency, Vegetable Fluency, p < .001), and executive function (Trail Making Test B, p = .02).

Conclusions: Separate normative data are needed for Primary vs. Secondary English speakers from Asian American backgrounds. We provide normative data on older Asian Americans to enable clinicians to account for English use in the interpretation of neuropsychological assessment scores.

Objective: The Cognitive Change Index (CCI-20) is a validated questionnaire that assesses subjective cognitive complaints (SCCs) across memory, language, and executive domains. We aimed to: (a) examine the internal consistency and construct validity of the CCI-20 in patients with movement disorders and (b) learn how the CCI-20 corresponds to objective neuropsychological and mood performance in individuals with Parkinson's disease (PD) or essential tremor (ET) seeking deep brain stimulation (DBS).

Methods: 216 participants (N = 149 PD; N = 67 ET) underwent neuropsychological evaluation and received the CCI-20. The proposed domains of the CCI-20 were examined via confirmatory (CFA) and exploratory (EFA) factor analyses. Hierarchical regressions were used to assess the relationship among subjective cognitive complaints, neuropsychological performance and mood symptoms.

Results: PD and ET groups were similar across neuropsychological, mood, and CCI-20 scores and were combined into one group who was well educated (m = 15.01 ± 2.92), in their mid-60's (m = 67.72 ± 9.33), predominantly male (63%), and non-Hispanic White (93.6%). Previously proposed 3-domain CCI-20 model failed to achieve adequate fit. Subsequent EFA revealed two CCI-20 factors: memory and non-memory (p < 0.001; CFI = 0.924). Regressions indicated apathy and depressive symptoms were associated with greater memory and total cognitive complaints, while poor executive function and anxiety were associated with more non-memory complaints.

Conclusion: Two distinct dimensions were identified in the CCI-20: memory and non-memory complaints. Non-memory complaints were indicative of worse executive function, consistent with PD and ET cognitive profiles. Mood significantly contributed to all CCI-20 dimensions. Future studies should explore the utility of SCCs in predicting cognitive decline in these populations.

Objective: Extensive research shows that tests of executive functioning (EF) predict instrumental activities of daily living (IADLs) but are nevertheless often criticized for having poor ecological validity. The Modified Six Elements Test (MSET) is a pencil-and-paper test that was developed to mimic the demands of daily life, with the assumption that this would result in a more ecologically valid test. Although the MSET has been extensively validated in its ability to capture cognitive deficits in various populations, support for its ability to predict functioning in daily life is mixed. This study aimed to examine the MSET's ability to predict IADLs assessed via three different modalities relative to traditional EF measures.

Method: Participants (93 adults aged 60 - 85) completed the MSET, traditional measures of EF (Delis-Kaplan Executive Function System; D-KEFS), and self-reported and performance-based IADLs in the lab. Participants then completed three weeks of IADL tasks at home, using the Daily Assessment of Independent Living and Executive Skills (DAILIES) protocol.

Results: The MSET predicted only IADLs completed at home, while the D-KEFS predicted IADLs across all three modalities. Further, the D-KEFS predicted home-based IADLs beyond the MSET when pitted against each other, whereas the MSET did not contribute beyond the D-KEFS.

Conclusions: Traditional EF tests (D-KEFS) appear to be superior to the MSET in predicting IADLs in community-dwelling older adults. The present results argue against replacing traditional measures with the MSET when addressing functional independence of generally high-functioning and cognitive healthy older adult patients.

Objective: The INECO Frontal Screening (IFS) and the Frontal Assessment Battery (FAB) are executive dysfunction (ED) screening tools that can distinguish patients with neurodegenerative disorders from healthy controls and, to some extent, between dementia subtypes. This paper aims to examine the suitability of these tests in assessing early-onset cognitive impairment and dementia patients.

Method: In a memory clinic patient cohort (age mean = 57.4 years) with symptom onset at ≤65 years, we analyzed the IFS and the FAB results of four groups: early-onset dementia (EOD, n = 49), mild cognitive impairment due to neurological causes (MCI-n, n = 34), MCI due to other causes such as depression (MCI-o, n = 99) and subjective cognitive decline (SCD, n = 14). Data were gathered at baseline and at 6 and 12 months. We also studied the tests' accuracy in distinguishing EOD from SCD patients and ED patients from those with intact executive functioning. Correlations with neuropsychological measures were also studied.

Results: The EOD group had significantly (p < .05) lower IFS and FAB total scores than the MCI-o and SCD groups. Compared with the FAB, the IFS showed more statistically significant (p < .05) differences between diagnostic groups, greater accuracy (IFS AUC = .80, FAB AUC = .75, p = .036) in detecting ED and marginally stronger correlations with neuropsychological measures. We found no statistically significant differences in the EOD group scores from baseline up to 6- or 12-months follow-up.

Conclusions: While both tests can detect EOD among memory clinic patients, the IFS may be more reliable in detecting ED than the FAB.

Objective: Subtle changes in memory, attention, and spatial navigation abilities have been associated with preclinical Alzheimer disease (AD). The current study examined whether baseline AD biomarkers are associated with self- and informant-reported decline in memory, attention, and spatial navigation.

Method: Clinically normal (Clinical Dementia Rating Scale (CDR®) = 0) adults aged 56-93 (N = 320) and their informants completed the memory, divided attention, and visuospatial abilities (which assesses spatial navigation) subsections of the Everyday Cognition Scale (ECog) annually for an average of 4 years. Biomarker data was collected within (±) 2 years of baseline (i.e., cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) p-tau₁₈₁/Aβ₄₂ ratio and hippocampal volume). Clinical progression was defined as CDR > 0 at time of final available ECog.

Results: Self- and informant-reported memory, attention, and spatial navigation significantly declined over time (ps < .001). Baseline AD biomarkers were significantly associated with self- and informant-reported decline in cognitive ability (ps < .030), with the exception of p-tau₁₈₁/Aβ₄₂ ratio and self-reported attention (p = .364). Clinical progression did not significantly moderate the relationship between AD biomarkers and decline in self- or informant-reported cognitive ability (ps > .062). Post-hoc analyses indicated that biomarker burden was also associated with self- and informant-reported decline in total ECog (ps < .002), and again clinical progression did not significantly moderate these relationships (ps > .299).

Conclusions: AD biomarkers at baseline may indicate risk of decline in self- and informant-reported change in memory, attention, and spatial navigation ability. As such, subjectively reported decline in these domains may have clinical utility in tracking the subtle cognitive changes associated with the earliest stages of AD.