4.2 Article

Social Cognition Tests Can Discriminate Behavioral Variant Frontotemporal Dementia From Alzheimer's Disease Independently of Executive Functioning

Journal

ARCHIVES OF CLINICAL NEUROPSYCHOLOGY
Volume 36, Issue 5, Pages 831-837

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/arclin/acaa084

Keywords

Alzheimer's disease; Frontotemporal dementia; Executive function

Funding

  1. Brazilian National Council for Scientific and Technological Development (CNPq-Bolsa de Produtividade em Pesquisa)
  2. FAPEMIG (bolsa de iniciacao cientifica)

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Utilizing the Mini-SEA, which includes the FERT and faux-pas test, accurately distinguishes between behavioral variant of frontotemporal dementia (bvFTD) and Alzheimer's disease (AD) patients, regardless of executive performance.
Objective: To investigate the accuracy of the Social and Emotional Assessment-short version (Mini-SEA) to differentiate subgroups of behavioral variant of frontotemporal dementia (bvFTD) and Alzheimer's disease (AD) defined according to executive performance. Methods: bvFTD (n = 21), AD (n = 20), and healthy controls (HC, n = 23) underwent the Mini-SEA, comprising the Facial Emotion Recognition Test (FERT) and the faux-pas test. AD and bvFTD patients were classified according to their performance in the Frontal Assessment Battery into dysexecutive and nondysexecutive subgroups. Results: The area under the curve (AUC) values for the faux-pas test were 0.87 (dysexecutive-bvFTD vs. dysexecutive-AD) and 0.96 (non-dysexecutive-bvFTD vs. nondysexecutive-AD). The AUC values for FERT were 0.99 (dysexecutive-bvFTD vs. dysexecutive-AD) and 0.65 (nondysexecutive-bvFTD vs. nondysexecutive-AD); the AUC values for theMini-SEA (total-score) were 0.95 (dysexecutive-bvFTD vs. dysexecutive-AD) and 0.88 (nondysexecutive-bvFTD vs. nondysexecutive-AD). Discussion: Social Cognition tests accurately distinguish bvFTD from AD regardless of the executive profile.

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