4.7 Article

Cognitive performance and informant reports in the diagnosis of cognitive impairment and dementia in African Americans and whites

Journal

ALZHEIMERS & DEMENTIA
Volume 5, Issue 6, Pages 445-453

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1016/j.jalz.2009.04.1234

Keywords

CERAD; IQCODE; Cognitive decline; CIND; Dementia; African American

Funding

  1. Health and Retirement Study and the Aging, Demographics, and Memory Study [U01 AG09740]
  2. National Institute on Aging [R01 AG027010]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: The diagnosis of cognitive impairment and dementia must reflect an increasingly diverse and aging United States population. This study compared direct testing and informant reports of cognition with clinical diagnoses of cognitive impairment and dementia between African Americans and whites. Methods: Participants in the Aging, Demographics, and Memory Study completed in-person dementia evaluations, and were assigned clinical diagnoses (by a consensus panel of dementia experts) of normal; cognitive impairment, not demented (CIND); and dementia. The Consortium to Establish a Registry for Alzheimer's Disease (CERAD) total score and the Informant Questionnaire on Cognitive Decline in the Elderly (IQCODE) were used to assess cognitive performance and reported cognitive decline. Results: A higher CERAD total score was associated with lower odds of CIND and dementia, at comparable ratios between African Americans and whites. Higher IQCODE scores were associated with increased odds of dementia in both African Americans and whites. Higher IQCODE scores were associated with increased odds of CIND among whites, but not among African Americans. Conclusions: Cultural differences may influence informant reports of prevalent CIND and dementia. Our findings also highlight the need for more comparative research to establish the cultural validity of measures used to diagnose these conditions. (C) 2009 The Alzheimer's Association. All rights reserved.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available