4.2 Article

Korean Version of Frontal Assessment Battery: Psychometric Properties and Normative Data

Journal

DEMENTIA AND GERIATRIC COGNITIVE DISORDERS
Volume 29, Issue 4, Pages 363-370

Publisher

KARGER
DOI: 10.1159/000297523

Keywords

Frontal Assessment Battery; Korean; Validity; Reliability; Normative data

Funding

  1. Pfizer Global Pharmaceuticals [06-05-039]
  2. Ministry for Health, Welfare & Family Affairs, Republic of Korea [A092077]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: We developed the Korean version of the Frontal Assessment Battery (FAB-K), evaluated its psychometric properties and constructed normative data for Korean elders. Methods: FAB-K was administered to 300 Alzheimer's disease (AD) patients and 635 normal controls. Reliability of FAB-K was evaluated by testing its internal consistency, test-retest and inter-rater reliabilities. Validity of FAB-K was evaluated by testing discriminant validity for AD and concurrent validity with other frontal function tests. Age-and education-specific normative data of FAB-K were developed. Results: Cronbach's alpha, inter-rater reliability and test-retest reliability of FAB-K were 0.802, 0.980 (p < 0.001) and 0.820 (p < 0.001), respectively. FAB-K exhibited significant correlations with the scores of MMSE and other frontal function tests (p < 0.01). Total and item scores of FAB-K were lower in AD patients than in controls and became worse as clinical dementia rating increased (F = 192.026, d.f. = 4, p < 0.001). The optimal cut-off score of FAB-K for AD was determined as 10/11, where sensitivity and specificity for AD were 0.717 and 0.827, respectively. Normative data were stratified by 3 age groups and 4 education groups. Conclusion: The FAB-K is a valid and reliable instrument for evaluating frontal dysfunction, and may be useful for screening AD. Copyright (C) 2010 S. Karger AG, Basel

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