Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society : JINS · 2021
Prognostic Value of Learning and Retention Measures from the Free and Cued Selective Reminding Test to Identify Incident Mild Cognitive Impairment.
СтатьяПоддержка NIH: внешняя программаResearch Support, N.I.H., IntramuralНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Grober Ellen, Wang Cuiling, Kitner-Triolo Melissa, Lipton Richard B, Kawas Claudia, Resnick Susan M
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To compare the predictive validity of learning and retention measures from the picture version of the Free and Cued Selective Reminding Test with Immediate Recall (pFCSRT + IR) for identifying incident mild cognitive impairment (MCI).
METHODS: Learning was defined by the sum of free recall (FR) and retention by delayed free recall (DFR) tested 15-20 min later. Totally, 1422 Baltimore Longitudinal Study of Aging (BLSA) participants (mean age 69.6 years, 54% male, mean 16.7 years of education) without dementia or MCI received the pFCSRT + IR at baseline and were followed longitudinally. Cox proportional hazards models were used to evaluate the effect of baseline learning and retention on risk of MCI.
RESULTS: In total, 187 participants developed MCI over a median of 8.1 years of follow-up. FR and DFR each predicted incident MCI adjusting for age, sex, and education. Also, each independently predicted incident MCI in the presence of the other with similar effect sizes: around 20% decrease in the hazard of MCI corresponding to one standard deviation increase in FR or DFR.
CONCLUSION: The practice of preferring retention over learning to predict incident MCI should be reconsidered. The decision to include retention should be guided by time constraints and patient burden.
METHODS: Learning was defined by the sum of free recall (FR) and retention by delayed free recall (DFR) tested 15-20 min later. Totally, 1422 Baltimore Longitudinal Study of Aging (BLSA) participants (mean age 69.6 years, 54% male, mean 16.7 years of education) without dementia or MCI received the pFCSRT + IR at baseline and were followed longitudinally. Cox proportional hazards models were used to evaluate the effect of baseline learning and retention on risk of MCI.
RESULTS: In total, 187 participants developed MCI over a median of 8.1 years of follow-up. FR and DFR each predicted incident MCI adjusting for age, sex, and education. Also, each independently predicted incident MCI in the presence of the other with similar effect sizes: around 20% decrease in the hazard of MCI corresponding to one standard deviation increase in FR or DFR.
CONCLUSION: The practice of preferring retention over learning to predict incident MCI should be reconsidered. The decision to include retention should be guided by time constraints and patient burden.