4.5 Review

The frontal assessment battery in clinical practice: a systematic review

Journal

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF GERIATRIC PSYCHIATRY
Volume 33, Issue 2, Pages 237-251

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/gps.4751

Keywords

frontal assessment battery; executive function assessment; frontal lobe; clinical usefulness; neuropsychological tests

Ask authors/readers for more resources

BackgroundThe frontal assessment battery (FAB) is a brief tool designed to evaluate executive function. Some studies have particularly focused on assessing its applicability addressing two issues: first, on detecting the brain regions responsible for the FAB performance, and second, on determining its capability for differential diagnosis. Our aim was to summarize and analyze critically the studies that assessed the neuroanatomical correspondence and the differential diagnostic value of the FAB in several study populations suffering from different pathologies. MethodsWe completed a literature search in MEDLINE (via PubMed) database by using the term frontal assessment battery and the combination of this term with applicability or use or usefulness. The search was limited to articles in English or Spanish languages, published between 1 September 2000 and 30 September 2016, human studies, and journal articles. ResultsA total of 32 studies met inclusion criteria. Seventeen studies were aimed at identifying the brain regions or the neural substrates involved in executive functions measured by the FAB and 15 studies at verifying that the FAB was an appropriate tool for the differential diagnosis in neurological diseases. ConclusionOur study showed that the FAB may be an adequate assessment tool for executive function and may provide useful information for differential diagnosis in several diseases. Given that the FAB takes short time and is easy to administer, its usage may be of great interest as part of a full neuropsychological assessment in clinical settings. Copyright (c) 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available