NACC中英语和西班牙语考生的认知轨迹

IF 11.1 1区 医学 Q1 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
Carlos E. E. Araujo-Menendez, Rubi A. Carpio, Wassim Tarraf, Alyssa L. Lawrence, Armando Lemus, Rachel Membreno, Carmen J. W. Chek, Ursula G. Saelzler, Elsa Baena, Alejandra Morlett Paredes, Ariana M. Stickel
{"title":"NACC中英语和西班牙语考生的认知轨迹","authors":"Carlos E. E. Araujo-Menendez,&nbsp;Rubi A. Carpio,&nbsp;Wassim Tarraf,&nbsp;Alyssa L. Lawrence,&nbsp;Armando Lemus,&nbsp;Rachel Membreno,&nbsp;Carmen J. W. Chek,&nbsp;Ursula G. Saelzler,&nbsp;Elsa Baena,&nbsp;Alejandra Morlett Paredes,&nbsp;Ariana M. Stickel","doi":"10.1002/alz.70721","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> BACKGROUND</h3>\n \n <p>Cognitive assessments were traditionally developed using English-speaking populations, creating a potential disadvantage and misrepresentation for non-English speakers. We aimed to determine whether English- and Spanish-test-takers have similar or different cognitive trajectories.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> METHODS</h3>\n \n <p>Participants included 931 Hispanic/Latino adults from the National Alzheimer's Coordinating Center. Using mixed-effects regression analyses, we examined baseline differences and longitudinal changes in memory, attention/working memory, executive functioning, and language between Spanish- and English-test-takers. Models controlled for age at baseline, education, sex, Hispanic/Latino heritage, and cognitive status.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> RESULTS</h3>\n \n <p>English-test-takers performed significantly better than Spanish-test-takers across all domains at baseline. No differences in cognitive trajectories were detected, except for attention/working memory, in which Spanish-test-takers declined at a slower rate than English-test-takers.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> DISCUSSION</h3>\n \n <p>Despite baseline differences, both groups exhibited largely similar cognitive aging trajectories. These findings suggest that cross-sectional differences may reflect measurement bias rather than differences in cognitive aging and an underestimation of cognitive abilities among Spanish speakers.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Highlights</h3>\n \n <div>\n <ul>\n \n <li>Baseline disparities in cognition were observed across all domains, except for language, with Spanish-test-takers scoring significantly lower than English-test-takers.</li>\n \n <li>Despite baseline differences, rates of cognitive decline were largely similar across language groups, suggesting potential measurement bias rather than differences in cognitive aging.</li>\n \n <li>Spanish-test-takers showed greater maintenance in attention over time, pointing to possible benefits from repeated testing or cultural factors that warrant further investigation.</li>\n </ul>\n </div>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":7471,"journal":{"name":"Alzheimer's & Dementia","volume":"21 9","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":11.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://alz-journals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/alz.70721","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Cognitive trajectories among English- and Spanish-test-takers in the NACC\",\"authors\":\"Carlos E. E. Araujo-Menendez,&nbsp;Rubi A. Carpio,&nbsp;Wassim Tarraf,&nbsp;Alyssa L. Lawrence,&nbsp;Armando Lemus,&nbsp;Rachel Membreno,&nbsp;Carmen J. W. Chek,&nbsp;Ursula G. Saelzler,&nbsp;Elsa Baena,&nbsp;Alejandra Morlett Paredes,&nbsp;Ariana M. Stickel\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/alz.70721\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div>\\n \\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> BACKGROUND</h3>\\n \\n <p>Cognitive assessments were traditionally developed using English-speaking populations, creating a potential disadvantage and misrepresentation for non-English speakers. We aimed to determine whether English- and Spanish-test-takers have similar or different cognitive trajectories.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> METHODS</h3>\\n \\n <p>Participants included 931 Hispanic/Latino adults from the National Alzheimer's Coordinating Center. Using mixed-effects regression analyses, we examined baseline differences and longitudinal changes in memory, attention/working memory, executive functioning, and language between Spanish- and English-test-takers. Models controlled for age at baseline, education, sex, Hispanic/Latino heritage, and cognitive status.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> RESULTS</h3>\\n \\n <p>English-test-takers performed significantly better than Spanish-test-takers across all domains at baseline. No differences in cognitive trajectories were detected, except for attention/working memory, in which Spanish-test-takers declined at a slower rate than English-test-takers.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> DISCUSSION</h3>\\n \\n <p>Despite baseline differences, both groups exhibited largely similar cognitive aging trajectories. These findings suggest that cross-sectional differences may reflect measurement bias rather than differences in cognitive aging and an underestimation of cognitive abilities among Spanish speakers.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Highlights</h3>\\n \\n <div>\\n <ul>\\n \\n <li>Baseline disparities in cognition were observed across all domains, except for language, with Spanish-test-takers scoring significantly lower than English-test-takers.</li>\\n \\n <li>Despite baseline differences, rates of cognitive decline were largely similar across language groups, suggesting potential measurement bias rather than differences in cognitive aging.</li>\\n \\n <li>Spanish-test-takers showed greater maintenance in attention over time, pointing to possible benefits from repeated testing or cultural factors that warrant further investigation.</li>\\n </ul>\\n </div>\\n </section>\\n </div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":7471,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Alzheimer's & Dementia\",\"volume\":\"21 9\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":11.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-09-24\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://alz-journals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/alz.70721\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Alzheimer's & Dementia\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://alz-journals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/alz.70721\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Alzheimer's & Dementia","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://alz-journals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/alz.70721","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

传统上,认知评估是在说英语的人群中进行的,这给非英语人群带来了潜在的劣势和误解。我们的目的是确定英语和西班牙语考生的认知轨迹是否相似或不同。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Cognitive trajectories among English- and Spanish-test-takers in the NACC

Cognitive trajectories among English- and Spanish-test-takers in the NACC

Cognitive trajectories among English- and Spanish-test-takers in the NACC

BACKGROUND

Cognitive assessments were traditionally developed using English-speaking populations, creating a potential disadvantage and misrepresentation for non-English speakers. We aimed to determine whether English- and Spanish-test-takers have similar or different cognitive trajectories.

METHODS

Participants included 931 Hispanic/Latino adults from the National Alzheimer's Coordinating Center. Using mixed-effects regression analyses, we examined baseline differences and longitudinal changes in memory, attention/working memory, executive functioning, and language between Spanish- and English-test-takers. Models controlled for age at baseline, education, sex, Hispanic/Latino heritage, and cognitive status.

RESULTS

English-test-takers performed significantly better than Spanish-test-takers across all domains at baseline. No differences in cognitive trajectories were detected, except for attention/working memory, in which Spanish-test-takers declined at a slower rate than English-test-takers.

DISCUSSION

Despite baseline differences, both groups exhibited largely similar cognitive aging trajectories. These findings suggest that cross-sectional differences may reflect measurement bias rather than differences in cognitive aging and an underestimation of cognitive abilities among Spanish speakers.

Highlights

  • Baseline disparities in cognition were observed across all domains, except for language, with Spanish-test-takers scoring significantly lower than English-test-takers.
  • Despite baseline differences, rates of cognitive decline were largely similar across language groups, suggesting potential measurement bias rather than differences in cognitive aging.
  • Spanish-test-takers showed greater maintenance in attention over time, pointing to possible benefits from repeated testing or cultural factors that warrant further investigation.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Alzheimer's & Dementia
Alzheimer's & Dementia 医学-临床神经学
CiteScore
14.50
自引率
5.00%
发文量
299
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: Alzheimer's & Dementia is a peer-reviewed journal that aims to bridge knowledge gaps in dementia research by covering the entire spectrum, from basic science to clinical trials to social and behavioral investigations. It provides a platform for rapid communication of new findings and ideas, optimal translation of research into practical applications, increasing knowledge across diverse disciplines for early detection, diagnosis, and intervention, and identifying promising new research directions. In July 2008, Alzheimer's & Dementia was accepted for indexing by MEDLINE, recognizing its scientific merit and contribution to Alzheimer's research.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信