4.7 Article

Sensitivity and specificity of neuropsychological tests for mild cognitive impairment, vascular cognitive impairment and Alzheimer's disease

期刊

PSYCHOLOGICAL MEDICINE
卷 33, 期 6, 页码 1039-1050

出版社

CAMBRIDGE UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1017/S0033291703008031

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background. Early diagnosis of dementia is important for those who might benefit from treatment. We designed a brief comprehensive neuropsychological test battery to help differentiate control subjects from patients with mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and dementia. Method. The battery included tests of memory, attention, executive function, speed, perception and visuospatial skills. It was administered to subjects from the OPTIMA cohort: 51 controls, 29 with MCI, 60 with 'possible' or 'probable' Alzheimer's disease (AD) (NINCDS/ADRDA) and 12 with cerebrovascular disease (CVD). Mann-Whitney U tests were used to compare performance of controls with other diagnostic groups. The sensitivity and specificity of the tests were determined using Receiver Operating Characteristic curve analyses. The effects of age, gender and years of education on test performance were determined with Spearman's rank correlations. Results. The AD group performed worse than controls on all tests except an attention task. The Hopkins Verbal Learning Test and The Placing Test for episodic memory showed significant discriminative capacity between controls and other groups. Attention and processing speed tests discriminated CVD from controls. Category fluency, episodic memory tests and the CLOX test for executive function distinguished MCI from AD. Spearman's correlations showed negative associations between age and processing speed. Years of education affected performance on all tests, except The Placing Test. Conclusions. Certain neuropsychological tests have been shown to be sensitive and specific in the differential diagnosis of various types of dementia and may prove to be useful for detection of MCI.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据