Searching for just a few words should be enough to get started. If you need to make more complex queries, use the tips below to guide you.
Article type: Research Article
Authors: Wang, Cuilinga; b; * | Katz, Mindy J.b | Chang, Katherine H.c; d | Qin, Jiyuea | Lipton, Richard B.a; b; e | Zwerling, Jessica L.b | Sliwinski, Martin J.g | Derby, Carol A.a; b | Rabin, Laura A.b; d; f
Affiliations: [a] Department of Epidemiology and Population Health, Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Bronx, NY, USA | [b] Saul R. Korey Department of Neurology, Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Bronx, NY, USA | [c] Department of Psychology, Queens College, City University of New York (CUNY), Queens, NY, USA | [d] Department of Psychology, The Graduate Center, City University of New York (CUNY), New York, NY, USA | [e] Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Medicine, Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Bronx, NY, USA | [f] Department of Psychology, Brooklyn College, City University of New York (CUNY), Brooklyn, NY, USA | [g] Department of Human Development and Family Studies, Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA, USA
Correspondence: [*] Correspondence to: Cuiling Wang, PhD, 1300 Morris Park Avenue, Block Bldg. Rm. 318, Bronx, NY 10461, USA. Tel.: +1 718 430 2006; E-mail: [email protected].
Abstract: Background: The Uniform Data Set, Version 3 Neuropsychological Battery (UDSNB3.0), from the database of the University of Washington’s National Alzheimer’s Coordinating Center (NACC), is widely used to characterize cognitive performance in clinical and research settings; however, norms for underrepresented community-based samples are scarce. Objective: We compared UDSNB 3.0 test scores between the Einstein Aging Study (EAS), composed of racially/ethnically diverse, community-dwelling older adults aged≥70 and the NACC, and report normative data from the EAS. Methods: Analyses included 225 cognitively normal EAS participants and comparable data from 5,031 NACC database participants. Linear regression models compared performance between the samples, adjusting for demographics (sex, age, education, race/ethnicity), depressive symptoms, and whether English was the first language. Linear regression models to examine demographic factors including age, sex, education and race/ethnicity as predictors for the neuropsychological tests were applied in EAS and NACC separately and were used to create a demographically adjusted z-score calculator. Results: Cognitive performance across all domains was worse in the EAS than in the NACC, adjusting for age, sex, education, race/ethnicity, and depression, and the differences remained in visuo-construction, visuospatial memory, confrontation naming, visual attention/processing speed, and executive functioning after further adjusting for whether English was the first language. In both samples, non-Hispanic Whites outperformed non-Hispanic Blacks and more education was associated with better cognitive performance. Conclusion: Differences observed in demographic, clinical, and cognitive characteristics between the community-based EAS sample and the nationwide NACC sample suggest that separate normative data that more accurately reflect non-clinic, community-based populations should be established.
Keywords: Aging, cognitive test norms, community sample, mild cognitive impairment, neuropsychology, racial/ethnic diversity
DOI: 10.3233/JAD-210538
Journal: Journal of Alzheimer's Disease, vol. 83, no. 4, pp. 1665-1678, 2021
IOS Press, Inc.
6751 Tepper Drive
Clifton, VA 20124
USA
Tel: +1 703 830 6300
Fax: +1 703 830 2300
[email protected]
For editorial issues, like the status of your submitted paper or proposals, write to [email protected]
IOS Press
Nieuwe Hemweg 6B
1013 BG Amsterdam
The Netherlands
Tel: +31 20 688 3355
Fax: +31 20 687 0091
[email protected]
For editorial issues, permissions, book requests, submissions and proceedings, contact the Amsterdam office [email protected]
Inspirees International (China Office)
Ciyunsi Beili 207(CapitaLand), Bld 1, 7-901
100025, Beijing
China
Free service line: 400 661 8717
Fax: +86 10 8446 7947
[email protected]
For editorial issues, like the status of your submitted paper or proposals, write to [email protected]
如果您在出版方面需要帮助或有任何建, 件至: [email protected]