Mild Cognitive Impairment Subtype Performance in Comparison to Healthy Older Controls on the NIH Toolbox and Cogstate.

IF 1.8 4区 医学 Q3 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
Sarah Garcia, Robert L Askew, Voyko Kavcic, Sarah Shair, Arijit K Bhaumik, Edna Rose, Stephen Campbell, Nicolas May, Benjamin M Hampstead, Hiroko H Dodge, Judith L Heidebrink, Henry L Paulson, Bruno Giordani
{"title":"Mild Cognitive Impairment Subtype Performance in Comparison to Healthy Older Controls on the NIH Toolbox and Cogstate.","authors":"Sarah Garcia, Robert L Askew, Voyko Kavcic, Sarah Shair, Arijit K Bhaumik, Edna Rose, Stephen Campbell, Nicolas May, Benjamin M Hampstead, Hiroko H Dodge, Judith L Heidebrink, Henry L Paulson, Bruno Giordani","doi":"10.1097/WAD.0000000000000587","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Early detection is necessary for the treatment of dementia. Computerized testing has become more widely used in clinical trials; however, it is unclear how sensitive these measures are to early signs of neurodegeneration. We investigated the use of the NIH Toolbox-Cognition (NIHTB-CB) and Cogstate-Brief computerized neuropsychological batteries in the identification of mild cognitive impairment (MCI) versus healthy older adults [healthy control (HC)] and amnestic (aMCI) versus nonamnestic MCI (naMCI). Exploratory analyses include investigating potential racial differences.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Two hundred six older adults were diagnosed as aMCI (n = 58), naMCI (n = 15), or cognitively healthy (HC; n = 133).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The NIH Toolbox-CB subtests of Flanker, Picture Sequence Memory, and Picture Vocabulary significantly differentiated MCI from HC. Further, subtests from both computerized batteries differentiated patients with aMCI from those with naMCI. Although the main effect of race differences was noted on tests and in diagnostic groups was significant, there were no significant race-by-test interactions.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Computer-based subtests vary in their ability to help distinguish MCI subtypes, though these tests provide less expensive and easier-to-administer clinical screeners to help identify patients early who may qualify for more comprehensive evaluations. Further work is needed, however, to refine computerized tests to achieve better precision in distinguishing impairment subtypes.</p>","PeriodicalId":7679,"journal":{"name":"Alzheimer Disease & Associated Disorders","volume":" ","pages":"328-334"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10873007/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Alzheimer Disease & Associated Disorders","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/WAD.0000000000000587","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/10/20 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Early detection is necessary for the treatment of dementia. Computerized testing has become more widely used in clinical trials; however, it is unclear how sensitive these measures are to early signs of neurodegeneration. We investigated the use of the NIH Toolbox-Cognition (NIHTB-CB) and Cogstate-Brief computerized neuropsychological batteries in the identification of mild cognitive impairment (MCI) versus healthy older adults [healthy control (HC)] and amnestic (aMCI) versus nonamnestic MCI (naMCI). Exploratory analyses include investigating potential racial differences.

Methods: Two hundred six older adults were diagnosed as aMCI (n = 58), naMCI (n = 15), or cognitively healthy (HC; n = 133).

Results: The NIH Toolbox-CB subtests of Flanker, Picture Sequence Memory, and Picture Vocabulary significantly differentiated MCI from HC. Further, subtests from both computerized batteries differentiated patients with aMCI from those with naMCI. Although the main effect of race differences was noted on tests and in diagnostic groups was significant, there were no significant race-by-test interactions.

Conclusions: Computer-based subtests vary in their ability to help distinguish MCI subtypes, though these tests provide less expensive and easier-to-administer clinical screeners to help identify patients early who may qualify for more comprehensive evaluations. Further work is needed, however, to refine computerized tests to achieve better precision in distinguishing impairment subtypes.

NIH Toolbox和Cogstate上与健康老年对照组相比的轻度认知障碍亚型表现。
背景:早期发现对于痴呆症的治疗是必要的。计算机测试在临床试验中的应用越来越广泛;然而,目前尚不清楚这些措施对神经退行性变的早期迹象有多敏感。我们研究了美国国立卫生研究院工具箱认知(NIHTB-CB)和Cogstate Brief计算机神经心理电池在识别轻度认知障碍(MCI)与健康老年人[健康对照组(HC)]以及遗忘症(aMCI)和非记忆性MCI(naMCI)中的应用。探索性分析包括调查潜在的种族差异。方法:206名老年人被诊断为aMCI(n=58)、naMCI(n=15)或认知健康(HC;n=133)。此外,来自两个计算机电池的亚测试将aMCI患者与naMCI患者区分开来。尽管在测试和诊断组中注意到种族差异的主要影响是显著的,但没有显著的种族间的相互作用。结论:基于计算机的亚测试在帮助区分MCI亚型的能力上各不相同,尽管这些测试提供了更便宜、更容易管理的临床筛查器,以帮助早期识别可能有资格进行更全面评估的患者。然而,还需要进一步的工作来完善计算机化测试,以提高区分损伤亚型的准确性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.10
自引率
4.80%
发文量
88
期刊介绍: ​Alzheimer Disease & Associated Disorders is a peer-reviewed, multidisciplinary journal directed to an audience of clinicians and researchers, with primary emphasis on Alzheimer disease and associated disorders. The journal publishes original articles emphasizing research in humans including epidemiologic studies, clinical trials and experimental studies, studies of diagnosis and biomarkers, as well as research on the health of persons with dementia and their caregivers. The scientific portion of the journal is augmented by reviews of the current literature, concepts, conjectures, and hypotheses in dementia, brief reports, and letters to the editor.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信