4.2 Article

Mild Cognitive Impairment in Late Middle Age in the Wisconsin Registry for Alzheimer's Prevention Study: Prevalence and Characteristics Using Robust and Standard Neuropsychological Normative Data

期刊

ARCHIVES OF CLINICAL NEUROPSYCHOLOGY
卷 31, 期 7, 页码 675-688

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/arclin/acw024

关键词

Mild cognitive impairment; Alzheimer's disease; Norms/normative studies; Elderly/Geriatrics/Aging; Dementia; Learning and Memory

资金

  1. Clinical Translational Science Award (CTSA) program, through the National Institutes of Health National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences (NCATS) [UL1TR00427]
  2. National Institutes of Health (NIH) [R01 AG027161, R01 AG021155, ADRC P50 AG033514]
  3. Wisconsin Alzheimer's Institute (WAI) Holland Research Fund

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective: Detecting cognitive decline in presymptomatic Alzheimer's disease (AD) and early mild cognitive impairment (MCI) is challenging, but important for treatments targeting AD-related neurodegeneration. The current study aimed to investigate the utility and performance of internally developed robust norms and standard norms in identifying cognitive impairment in late middle-age (baseline age range = 36-68; M = 54). Method: Robust norms were developed for neuropsychological measures based on longitudinally confirmed cognitively normal (CN) participants (n = 476). Seven hundred and seventy-nine participants enriched for AD risk were classified as psychometric MCI (pMCI) or CN based on standard and robust norms and single-test versus multi-test criteria. Results: Prevalence of pMCI ranged from 3% to 49% depending on the classification scheme used. Those classified as pMCI using robust norms exhibited greater subjective cognitive complaints, diagnostic stability, and mild clinical symptoms at follow-up. Conclusions: Results suggest that identifying early clinically relevant cognitive decline in late middle-age is feasible using robust norms and multi-test criteria.

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

4.2
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