TOMMORROW neuropsychological battery: German language validation and normative study

Alzheimer's and Dementia: Translational Research and Clinical Interventions - Tập 4 - Trang 314-323 - 2018
Heather R. Romero1,2, Andreas U. Monsch3, Kathleen M. Hayden1,2,4, Brenda L. Plassman1,2, Alexandra S. Atkins5, Richard S.E. Keefe2,5, Shyama Brewster6, Carl Chiang6, Janet O'Neil7, Grant Runyan7, Mark J. Atkinson8,9, Stephen Crawford8, Kumar Budur7, Daniel K. Burns6, Kathleen A. Welsh-Bohmer1,2
1Joseph & Kathleen Bryan Alzheimer's Disease Research Center (Bryan ADRC), Duke University, Durham, NC, USA
2Department of Psychiatry, Duke University, Durham, NC, USA
3University Center for Medicine of Aging, Felix Platter Hospital, Basel, Switzerland
4Department of Social Sciences and Health Policy, Wake Forest School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, NC, USA
5NeuroCog Trials, Durham, NC, USA
6Zinfandel Pharmaceuticals Inc, Chapel Hill, NC, USA
7Takeda Development Center Americas, Inc., Deerfield, IL, USA
8Covance Inc., Princeton, NJ, USA
9Department of Family Medicine and Public Health, University of California, San Diego, CA, USA

Tóm tắt

AbstractIntroductionAssessment 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.

Tài liệu tham khảo

10.1176/ajp.141.11.1356 10.1038/nrneurol.2015.177 10.1016/j.jalz.2014.02.002 10.1001/jamaneurol.2014.803 10.1038/clpt.2012.222 10.1016/j.jalz.2013.04.079 10.1016/j.jalz.2011.03.008 Benedict R.H.B., 1997, Brief Visuospatial Memory Test Revised Professional Manual Delis D.C., 2000, California Verbal Learning Test 10.1037/h0044509 10.1017/S1366728911000332 Heaton R.K., 2004, Revised Comprehensive Norms for an Expanded Halstead‐Reitan Battery: Demographically Adjusted Neuropsychological Norms for African American and Caucasian Adults, Professional Manual Wechsler D., 1977, WAIS‐III WMS‐III Technical Manual 10.1093/arclin/11.6.529 10.1111/j.1524-4733.2008.00471.x 10.1016/0022-3956(75)90026-6 10.1016/0022-3956(82)90033-4 10.1097/01.wad.0000213879.55547.57 10.1080/09297040701233875 Oosterhuis H., 2015, Sample size requirements for traditional and regression‐based norms, Assessment, 23, 191, 10.1177/1073191115580638 10.1017/S1355617701755105 10.1037/0894-4105.19.4.520 10.1001/archneur.1991.00530150046016 10.1001/archpsyc.58.9.853 10.1001/archneur.1995.00540350081020 10.1016/j.jalz.2014.05.1492 Strauss E., 2006, A Compendium of Neuropsychological Tests: Administration, Norms, and Commentary 10.1002/1099-1166(200006)15:6<548::AID-GPS242>3.0.CO;2-U 10.1080/13854040801894730
Thông tin
Thông tin xuất bản

Alzheimer's and Dementia: Translational Research and Clinical Interventions

Tập 4

314-323

Thông tin tác giả