OBJECTIVES: Operational definitions of cognitive impairment have varied widely in diagnosing mild cognitive impairment (MCI). Identifying clinical subtypes of MCI has further challenged diagnostic approaches because varying the components of the objective cognitive assessment can significantly impact diagnosis. Therefore, the authors investigated the applicability of diagnostic criteria for clinical subtypes of MCI in a naturalistic research sample of community elders and quantified the variability in diagnostic outcomes that results from modifying the neuropsychological definition of objective cognitive impairment. DESIGN: Cross-sectional and longitudinal study. SETTING: San Diego, CA, Veterans Administration Hospital. PARTICIPANTS: Ninety nondemented, neurologically normal, community-dwelling older adults were initially assessed and 73 were seen for follow-up approximately 17 months later. MEASUREMENTS: Participants were classified via consensus diagnosis as either normally aging or having MCI via each of the five diagnostic strategies, which varied the cutoff for objective impairment and the number of neuropsychological tests considered in the diagnostic process. RESULTS: A range of differences in the percentages identified as MCI versus cognitively normal were demonstrated, ranging from 10-74%, depending on the classification criteria used. A substantial minority of individuals demonstrated diagnostic instability over time and across diagnostic approaches. The single domain nonamnestic subtype diagnosis was particularly unstable (e.g., prone to reclassification as normal at follow up). CONCLUSION: Our findings provide empirical support for a neuropsychologically derived operational definition of clinical subtypes of MCI and point to the importance of using comprehensive neuropsychological assessments. Diagnoses, particularly involving nonamnestic MCI, were variable over time. The applicability and utility of this particular MCI subtype warrants further investigation.
OBJECTIVES: Operational definitions of cognitive impairment have varied widely in diagnosing mild cognitive impairment (MCI). Identifying clinical subtypes of MCI has further challenged diagnostic approaches because varying the components of the objective cognitive assessment can significantly impact diagnosis. Therefore, the authors investigated the applicability of diagnostic criteria for clinical subtypes of MCI in a naturalistic research sample of community elders and quantified the variability in diagnostic outcomes that results from modifying the neuropsychological definition of objective cognitive impairment. DESIGN: Cross-sectional and longitudinal study. SETTING: San Diego, CA, Veterans Administration Hospital. PARTICIPANTS: Ninety nondemented, neurologically normal, community-dwelling older adults were initially assessed and 73 were seen for follow-up approximately 17 months later. MEASUREMENTS: Participants were classified via consensus diagnosis as either normally aging or having MCI via each of the five diagnostic strategies, which varied the cutoff for objective impairment and the number of neuropsychological tests considered in the diagnostic process. RESULTS: A range of differences in the percentages identified as MCI versus cognitively normal were demonstrated, ranging from 10-74%, depending on the classification criteria used. A substantial minority of individuals demonstrated diagnostic instability over time and across diagnostic approaches. The single domain nonamnestic subtype diagnosis was particularly unstable (e.g., prone to reclassification as normal at follow up). CONCLUSION: Our findings provide empirical support for a neuropsychologically derived operational definition of clinical subtypes of MCI and point to the importance of using comprehensive neuropsychological assessments. Diagnoses, particularly involving nonamnestic MCI, were variable over time. The applicability and utility of this particular MCI subtype warrants further investigation.
Authors: Matthias H Tabert; Jennifer J Manly; Xinhua Liu; Gregory H Pelton; Sara Rosenblum; Marni Jacobs; Diana Zamora; Madeleine Goodkind; Karen Bell; Yaakov Stern; D P Devanand Journal: Arch Gen Psychiatry Date: 2006-08
Authors: Joel H Kramer; Adam Nelson; Julene K Johnson; Kristine Yaffe; Shenly Glenn; Howard J Rosen; Bruce L Miller Journal: Dement Geriatr Cogn Disord Date: 2006-08-23 Impact factor: 2.959
Authors: O L Lopez; J T Becker; W J Jagust; A Fitzpatrick; M C Carlson; S T DeKosky; J Breitner; C G Lyketsos; B Jones; C Kawas; L H Kuller Journal: J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry Date: 2005-08-15 Impact factor: 10.154
Authors: Katherine J Bangen; Amy J Jak; Dawn M Schiehser; Lisa Delano-Wood; Elizabeth Tuminello; S Duke Han; Dean C Delis; Mark W Bondi Journal: J Int Neuropsychol Soc Date: 2010-04-07 Impact factor: 2.892
Authors: Laura A Rabin; Colette M Smart; Paul K Crane; Rebecca E Amariglio; Lorin M Berman; Mercé Boada; Rachel F Buckley; Gaël Chételat; Bruno Dubois; Kathryn A Ellis; Katherine A Gifford; Angela L Jefferson; Frank Jessen; Mindy J Katz; Richard B Lipton; Tobias Luck; Paul Maruff; Michelle M Mielke; José Luis Molinuevo; Farnia Naeem; Audrey Perrotin; Ronald C Petersen; Lorena Rami; Barry Reisberg; Dorene M Rentz; Steffi G Riedel-Heller; Shannon L Risacher; Octavio Rodriguez; Perminder S Sachdev; Andrew J Saykin; Melissa J Slavin; Beth E Snitz; Reisa A Sperling; Caroline Tandetnik; Wiesje M van der Flier; Michael Wagner; Steffen Wolfsgruber; Sietske A M Sikkes Journal: J Alzheimers Dis Date: 2015-09-24 Impact factor: 4.472
Authors: Lindsay R Clark; Nikki H Stricker; David J Libon; Lisa Delano-Wood; David P Salmon; Dean C Delis; Mark W Bondi Journal: Clin Neuropsychol Date: 2012-10-02 Impact factor: 3.535
Authors: Sarah E Cook; Michael Marsiske; Kelsey R Thomas; Frederick W Unverzagt; Virginia G Wadley; Jessica B S Langbaum; Michael Crowe Journal: J Int Neuropsychol Soc Date: 2012-10-25 Impact factor: 2.892
Authors: Rebecca L Koscik; Asenath La Rue; Erin M Jonaitis; Ozioma C Okonkwo; Sterling C Johnson; Barbara B Bendlin; Bruce P Hermann; Mark A Sager Journal: Dement Geriatr Cogn Disord Date: 2014-02-20 Impact factor: 2.959
Authors: Sarah Seligman Rycroft; Lien T Quach; Rachel E Ward; Mette M Pedersen; Laura Grande; Jonathan F Bean Journal: J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci Date: 2019-03-14 Impact factor: 6.053
Authors: Andrea R Zammit; Charles B Hall; Mindy J Katz; Graciela Muniz-Terrera; Ali Ezzati; David A Bennett; Richard B Lipton Journal: J Alzheimers Dis Date: 2018 Impact factor: 4.472
Authors: Lindsay R Clark; Rebecca L Koscik; Christopher R Nicholas; Ozioma C Okonkwo; Corinne D Engelman; Lisa C Bratzke; Kirk J Hogan; Kimberly D Mueller; Barbara B Bendlin; Cynthia M Carlsson; Sanjay Asthana; Mark A Sager; Bruce P Hermann; Sterling C Johnson Journal: Arch Clin Neuropsychol Date: 2016-11-22 Impact factor: 2.813