Taylor Rigby, Allyson M. Gregoire, Johnathan Reader, Yonatan Kahsay, Jordan Fisher, Anson Kairys, Arijit K. Bhaumik, Annalise Rahman-Filipiak, Amanda Cook Maher, Benjamin M. Hampstead, Judith L. Heidebrink, Voyko Kavcic, Bruno Giordani
{"title":"使用美国国立卫生研究院工具箱认知平板电脑电池识别黑人和白人社区老年人的失忆性轻度认知障碍","authors":"Taylor Rigby, Allyson M. Gregoire, Johnathan Reader, Yonatan Kahsay, Jordan Fisher, Anson Kairys, Arijit K. Bhaumik, Annalise Rahman-Filipiak, Amanda Cook Maher, Benjamin M. Hampstead, Judith L. Heidebrink, Voyko Kavcic, Bruno Giordani","doi":"10.1017/s1355617724000213","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objectives: Identify which NIH Toolbox Cognition Battery (NIHTB-CB) subtest(s) best differentiate healthy controls (HC) from those with amnestic mild cognitive impairment (aMCI) and compare the discriminant accuracy between a model using a priori “Norm Adjusted” scores versus “Unadjusted” standard scores with age, sex, race/ethnicity, and education controlled for within the model. Racial differences were also examined. Methods: Participants were Black/African American (B/AA) and White consensus-confirmed (HC = 96; aMCI = 62) adults 60–85 years old that completed the NIHTB-CB for tablet. Discriminant function analysis (DFA) was used in the Total Sample and separately for B/AA (<jats:italic>n</jats:italic> = 80) and White participants (<jats:italic>n</jats:italic> = 78). Results: Picture Sequence Memory (an episodic memory task) was the highest loading coefficient across all DFA models. When stratified by race, differences were noted in the pattern of the highest loading coefficients within the DFAs. However, the overall discriminant accuracy of the DFA models in identifying HCs and those with aMCI did not differ significantly by race (B/AA, White) or model/score type (Norm Adjusted versus Unadjusted). Conclusions: Racial differences were noted despite the use of normalized scores or demographic covariates—highlighting the importance of including underrepresented groups in research. While the models were fairly accurate at identifying consensus-confirmed HCs, the models proved less accurate at identifying White participants with an aMCI diagnosis. In clinical settings, further work is needed to optimize computerized batteries and the use of NIHTB-CB norm adjusted scores is recommended. In research settings, demographically corrected scores or within model correction is suggested.","PeriodicalId":49995,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society","volume":"14 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Identification of amnestic mild cognitive impairment among Black and White community-dwelling older adults using NIH Toolbox Cognition tablet battery\",\"authors\":\"Taylor Rigby, Allyson M. Gregoire, Johnathan Reader, Yonatan Kahsay, Jordan Fisher, Anson Kairys, Arijit K. Bhaumik, Annalise Rahman-Filipiak, Amanda Cook Maher, Benjamin M. Hampstead, Judith L. Heidebrink, Voyko Kavcic, Bruno Giordani\",\"doi\":\"10.1017/s1355617724000213\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Objectives: Identify which NIH Toolbox Cognition Battery (NIHTB-CB) subtest(s) best differentiate healthy controls (HC) from those with amnestic mild cognitive impairment (aMCI) and compare the discriminant accuracy between a model using a priori “Norm Adjusted” scores versus “Unadjusted” standard scores with age, sex, race/ethnicity, and education controlled for within the model. Racial differences were also examined. Methods: Participants were Black/African American (B/AA) and White consensus-confirmed (HC = 96; aMCI = 62) adults 60–85 years old that completed the NIHTB-CB for tablet. Discriminant function analysis (DFA) was used in the Total Sample and separately for B/AA (<jats:italic>n</jats:italic> = 80) and White participants (<jats:italic>n</jats:italic> = 78). Results: Picture Sequence Memory (an episodic memory task) was the highest loading coefficient across all DFA models. When stratified by race, differences were noted in the pattern of the highest loading coefficients within the DFAs. However, the overall discriminant accuracy of the DFA models in identifying HCs and those with aMCI did not differ significantly by race (B/AA, White) or model/score type (Norm Adjusted versus Unadjusted). Conclusions: Racial differences were noted despite the use of normalized scores or demographic covariates—highlighting the importance of including underrepresented groups in research. While the models were fairly accurate at identifying consensus-confirmed HCs, the models proved less accurate at identifying White participants with an aMCI diagnosis. In clinical settings, further work is needed to optimize computerized batteries and the use of NIHTB-CB norm adjusted scores is recommended. In research settings, demographically corrected scores or within model correction is suggested.\",\"PeriodicalId\":49995,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society\",\"volume\":\"14 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1017/s1355617724000213\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/s1355617724000213","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Identification of amnestic mild cognitive impairment among Black and White community-dwelling older adults using NIH Toolbox Cognition tablet battery
Objectives: Identify which NIH Toolbox Cognition Battery (NIHTB-CB) subtest(s) best differentiate healthy controls (HC) from those with amnestic mild cognitive impairment (aMCI) and compare the discriminant accuracy between a model using a priori “Norm Adjusted” scores versus “Unadjusted” standard scores with age, sex, race/ethnicity, and education controlled for within the model. Racial differences were also examined. Methods: Participants were Black/African American (B/AA) and White consensus-confirmed (HC = 96; aMCI = 62) adults 60–85 years old that completed the NIHTB-CB for tablet. Discriminant function analysis (DFA) was used in the Total Sample and separately for B/AA (n = 80) and White participants (n = 78). Results: Picture Sequence Memory (an episodic memory task) was the highest loading coefficient across all DFA models. When stratified by race, differences were noted in the pattern of the highest loading coefficients within the DFAs. However, the overall discriminant accuracy of the DFA models in identifying HCs and those with aMCI did not differ significantly by race (B/AA, White) or model/score type (Norm Adjusted versus Unadjusted). Conclusions: Racial differences were noted despite the use of normalized scores or demographic covariates—highlighting the importance of including underrepresented groups in research. While the models were fairly accurate at identifying consensus-confirmed HCs, the models proved less accurate at identifying White participants with an aMCI diagnosis. In clinical settings, further work is needed to optimize computerized batteries and the use of NIHTB-CB norm adjusted scores is recommended. In research settings, demographically corrected scores or within model correction is suggested.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society is the official journal of the International Neuropsychological Society, an organization of over 4,500 international members from a variety of disciplines. The Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society welcomes original, creative, high quality research papers covering all areas of neuropsychology. The focus of articles may be primarily experimental, applied, or clinical. Contributions will broadly reflect the interest of all areas of neuropsychology, including but not limited to: development of cognitive processes, brain-behavior relationships, adult and pediatric neuropsychology, neurobehavioral syndromes (such as aphasia or apraxia), and the interfaces of neuropsychology with related areas such as behavioral neurology, neuropsychiatry, genetics, and cognitive neuroscience. Papers that utilize behavioral, neuroimaging, and electrophysiological measures are appropriate.
To assure maximum flexibility and to promote diverse mechanisms of scholarly communication, the following formats are available in addition to a Regular Research Article: Brief Communication is a shorter research article; Rapid Communication is intended for "fast breaking" new work that does not yet justify a full length article and is placed on a fast review track; Case Report is a theoretically important and unique case study; Critical Review and Short Review are thoughtful considerations of topics of importance to neuropsychology and include meta-analyses; Dialogue provides a forum for publishing two distinct positions on controversial issues in a point-counterpoint format; Special Issue and Special Section consist of several articles linked thematically; Letter to the Editor responds to recent articles published in the Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society; and Book Review, which is considered but is no longer solicited.