Toward a cross-cultural understanding of intraindividual variability metrics.

Abstract

Objective: Compare the construct validity and predictive utility of cognitive intraindividual variability (IIV) in a sample of community-dwelling Hispanic and non-Hispanic white (NHW) older adults.

Methods: The present study included annual data from 651 older adult control participants (Hispanic = 293; NHW = 358) enrolled in the Texas Alzheimer's Research and Care Consortium for at least 5 years. Mean composite z-scores were calculated for attention, language, memory, and executive domains. IIV was calculated as was the standard deviation both within (IIV-Within) and between (IIV-Between) these domains.

Results: At baseline, NHW individuals obtained significantly higher mean scores in each domain than their Hispanic counterparts. They also showed significantly greater variability within and between domains, except for IIV-Within the language domain which was significantly larger in the Hispanic group. IIV-Between domains was driven primarily by IIV-Within the executive function domain in the NHW cohort and by IIV-Within the language domain in the Hispanic cohort. In both groups, the addition of IIV-Within and IIV-Between cognitive domains at baseline significantly improved prediction of global cognitive status after 5 years above and beyond demographic characteristics, genetic and cardiovascular risk. However, IIV-Between domains was the strongest predictor in the NHW group, while IIV-Within the attention domain was the strongest predictor in the Hispanic group.

Conclusions: Findings suggest that, while IIV-Between domains is a promising adjunctive method for predicting future cognitive decline, its construct validity and predictive utility varies based on ethnic group.