4.2 Article

Prognostic Value of Learning and Retention Measures from the Free and Cued Selective Reminding Test to Identify Incident Mild Cognitive Impairment

Journal

Publisher

CAMBRIDGE UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1017/S1355617721000291

Keywords

Mild cognitive impairment; Alzheimer's disease; Prospective studies; Verbal learning; Retention; Memory disorders; Preclinical dementia; Free and Cued Selective Reminding Test

Funding

  1. National Institute on Aging, NIH
  2. NIH [2PO1 AG003949]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The learning and retention measures from the picture version of the Free and Cued Selective Reminding Test with Immediate Recall (pFCSRT + IR) can predict the risk of incident mild cognitive impairment (MCI).
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.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available