Dataset Information

A web-based normative calculator for the uniform data set (UDS) neuropsychological test battery.

ABSTRACT: With the recent publication of new criteria for the diagnosis of preclinical Alzheimer's disease (AD), there is a need for neuropsychological tools that take premorbid functioning into account in order to detect subtle cognitive decline. Using demographic adjustments is one method for increasing the sensitivity of commonly used measures. We sought to provide a useful online z-score calculator that yields estimates of percentile ranges and adjusts individual performance based on sex, age and/or education for each of the neuropsychological tests of the National Alzheimer's Coordinating Center Uniform Data Set (NACC, UDS). In addition, we aimed to provide an easily accessible method of creating norms for other clinical researchers for their own, unique data sets.Data from 3,268 clinically cognitively-normal older UDS subjects from a cohort reported by Weintraub and colleagues (2009) were included. For all neuropsychological tests, z-scores were estimated by subtracting the raw score from the predicted mean and then dividing this difference score by the root mean squared error term (RMSE) for a given linear regression model.For each neuropsychological test, an estimated z-score was calculated for any raw score based on five different models that adjust for the demographic predictors of SEX, AGE and EDUCATION, either concurrently, individually or without covariates. The interactive online calculator allows the entry of a raw score and provides five corresponding estimated z-scores based on predictions from each corresponding linear regression model. The calculator produces percentile ranks and graphical output.An interactive, regression-based, normative score online calculator was created to serve as an additional resource for UDS clinical researchers, especially in guiding interpretation of individual performances that appear to fall in borderline realms and may be of particular utility for operationalizing subtle cognitive impairment present according to the newly proposed criteria for Stage 3 preclinical Alzheimer's disease.

SUBMITTER: Shirk SD

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3308021 | biostudies-literature | 2011 Nov

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

A web-based normative calculator for the uniform data set (UDS) neuropsychological test battery.

Shirk Steven D SD Mitchell Meghan B MB Shaughnessy Lynn W LW Sherman Janet C JC Locascio Joseph J JJ Weintraub Sandra S Atri Alireza A

Alzheimer's research & therapy 20111111 6

<h4>Introduction</h4>With the recent publication of new criteria for the diagnosis of preclinical Alzheimer's disease (AD), there is a need for neuropsychological tools that take premorbid functioning into account in order to detect subtle cognitive decline. Using demographic adjustments is one method for increasing the sensitivity of commonly used measures. We sought to provide a useful online z-score calculator that yields estimates of percentile ranges and adjusts individual performance based ...[more]

PMID: 22078663

Similar Datasets

Project description:IntroductionAssessment of preclinical Alzheimer's disease (AD) requires reliable and validated methods to detect subtle cognitive changes. The battery of standardized cognitive assessments that is used for diagnostic criteria for mild cognitive impairment due to AD in the TOMMORROW study have only been fully validated in English-speaking countries. We conducted a validation and normative study of the German language version of the TOMMORROW neuropsychological test battery, which tests episodic memory, language, visuospatial ability, executive function, and attention.MethodsGerman-speaking cognitively healthy controls (NCs) and subjects with AD were recruited from a memory clinic at a Swiss medical center. Construct validity, test-retest, and alternate form reliability were assessed in NCs. Criterion and discriminant validities of the cognitive measures were tested using logistic regression and discriminant analysis. Cross-cultural equivalency of performance of the German language tests was compared with English language tests.ResultsA total of 198 NCs and 25 subjects with AD (aged 65-88 years) were analyzed. All German language tests discriminated NCs from persons with AD. Episodic memory tests had the highest potential to discriminate with almost twice the predictive power of any other domain. Test-retest reliability of the test battery was adequate, and alternate form reliability for episodic memory tests was supported. For most tests, age was a significant predictor of group effect sizes; therefore, normative data were stratified by age. Validity and reliability results were similar to those in the published US cognitive testing literature.DiscussionThis study establishes the reliability and validity of the German language TOMMORROW test battery, which performed similarly to the English language tests. Some variations in test performance underscore the importance of regional normative values. The German language battery and normative data will improve the precision of measuring cognition and diagnosing incident mild cognitive impairment due to AD in clinical settings in German-speaking countries.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Computerized assessments are already used to derive accurate and reliable measures of cognitive function. Web-based cognitive assessment could improve the accessibility and flexibility of research and clinical assessment, widen participation, and promote research recruitment while simultaneously reducing costs. However, differences in context may influence task performance. OBJECTIVE:This study aims to determine the comparability of an unsupervised, web-based administration of the Cambridge Neuropsychological Test Automated Battery (CANTAB) against a typical in-person lab-based assessment, using a within-subjects counterbalanced design. The study aims to test (1) reliability, quantifying the relationship between measurements across settings using correlational approaches; (2) equivalence, the extent to which test results in different settings produce similar overall results; and (3) agreement, by quantifying acceptable limits to bias and differences between measurement environments. METHODS:A total of 51 healthy adults (32 women and 19 men; mean age 36.8, SD 15.6 years) completed 2 testing sessions, which were completed on average 1 week apart (SD 4.5 days). Assessments included equivalent tests of emotion recognition (emotion recognition task [ERT]), visual recognition (pattern recognition memory [PRM]), episodic memory (paired associate learning [PAL]), working memory and spatial planning (spatial working memory [SWM] and one touch stockings of Cambridge), and sustained attention (rapid visual information processing [RVP]). Participants were randomly allocated to one of the two groups, either assessed in-person in the laboratory first (n=33) or with unsupervised web-based assessments on their personal computing systems first (n=18). Performance indices (errors, correct trials, and response sensitivity) and median reaction times were extracted. Intraclass and bivariate correlations examined intersetting reliability, linear mixed models and Bayesian paired sample t tests tested for equivalence, and Bland-Altman plots examined agreement. RESULTS:Intraclass correlation (ICC) coefficients ranged from ?=0.23-0.67, with high correlations in 3 performance indices (from PAL, SWM, and RVP tasks; ??0.60). High ICC values were also seen for reaction time measures from 2 tasks (PRM and ERT tasks; ??0.60). However, reaction times were slower during web-based assessments, which undermined both equivalence and agreement for reaction time measures. Performance indices did not differ between assessment settings and generally showed satisfactory agreement. CONCLUSIONS:Our findings support the comparability of CANTAB performance indices (errors, correct trials, and response sensitivity) in unsupervised, web-based assessments with in-person and laboratory tests. Reaction times are not as easily translatable from in-person to web-based testing, likely due to variations in computer hardware. The results underline the importance of examining more than one index to ascertain comparability, as high correlations can present in the context of systematic differences, which are a product of differences between measurement environments. Further work is now needed to examine web-based assessments in clinical populations and in larger samples to improve sensitivity for detecting subtler differences between test settings.

Dataset Information

A web-based normative calculator for the uniform data set (UDS) neuropsychological test battery.

Publications

A web-based normative calculator for the uniform data set (UDS) neuropsychological test battery.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets