BACKGROUND: The HIV Dementia Scale (HDS) was developed to screen for HIV-associated neurocognitive disorders (HAND), but concerns have persisted regarding its substandard sensitivity. This study aimed to examine the classification accuracy of the HDS using raw and norm-based cut points and to evaluate the contribution of the HDS subtests to predicting HAND. METHODS: A total of 1580 HIV-infected participants from 6 US sites completed the HDS, and a gold standard neuropsychological battery, on which 51% of participants were impaired. RESULTS: Sensitivity and specificity to HAND using the standard raw HDS cut point were 24% and 92%, respectively. The raw HDS subtests of attention, recall, and psychomotor speed significantly contributed to classification of HAND, whereas visuomotor construction contributed the least. A modified raw cut point of 14 yielded sensitivity of 66% and specificity of 61%, with cross-validation. Using norms also significantly improved sensitivity to 69% with a concomitant reduction of specificity to 56%, whereas the positive predictive value declined from 75% to 62% and negative predictive value improved from 54% to 64%. The HDS showed similarly modest rates of sensitivity and specificity among subpopulations of individuals with minimal comorbidity and successful viral suppression. CONCLUSIONS: Findings indicate that while the HDS is a statistically significant predictor of HAND, particularly when adjusted for demographic factors, its relatively low diagnostic classification accuracy continues to hinder its clinical utility. A raw cut point of 14 greatly improved the sensitivity of the previously established raw cut score, but may be subject to ceiling effects, particularly on repeat assessments.
BACKGROUND: The HIV Dementia Scale (HDS) was developed to screen for HIV-associated neurocognitive disorders (HAND), but concerns have persisted regarding its substandard sensitivity. This study aimed to examine the classification accuracy of the HDS using raw and norm-based cut points and to evaluate the contribution of the HDS subtests to predicting HAND. METHODS: A total of 1580 HIV-infectedparticipants from 6 US sites completed the HDS, and a gold standard neuropsychological battery, on which 51% of participants were impaired. RESULTS: Sensitivity and specificity to HAND using the standard raw HDS cut point were 24% and 92%, respectively. The raw HDS subtests of attention, recall, and psychomotor speed significantly contributed to classification of HAND, whereas visuomotor construction contributed the least. A modified raw cut point of 14 yielded sensitivity of 66% and specificity of 61%, with cross-validation. Using norms also significantly improved sensitivity to 69% with a concomitant reduction of specificity to 56%, whereas the positive predictive value declined from 75% to 62% and negative predictive value improved from 54% to 64%. The HDS showed similarly modest rates of sensitivity and specificity among subpopulations of individuals with minimal comorbidity and successful viral suppression. CONCLUSIONS: Findings indicate that while the HDS is a statistically significant predictor of HAND, particularly when adjusted for demographic factors, its relatively low diagnostic classification accuracy continues to hinder its clinical utility. A raw cut point of 14 greatly improved the sensitivity of the previously established raw cut score, but may be subject to ceiling effects, particularly on repeat assessments.
Authors: Eileen M Martin; Richard M Novak; Michael Fendrich; Jasmin Vassileva; Raul Gonzalez; Silvana Grbesic; Gerald Nunnally; Lisa Sworowski Journal: J Int Neuropsychol Soc Date: 2004-03 Impact factor: 2.892
Authors: Clifford A Smith; Wilfred G van Gorp; Elizabeth R Ryan; Stephen J Ferrando; Judith Rabkin Journal: J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr Date: 2003-05-01 Impact factor: 3.731
Authors: Knut A Hestad; J Anitha Menon; Mary Silalukey-Ngoma; Donald R Franklin; Mwiya L Imasiku; Kalima Kalima; Robert K Heaton Journal: J Nerv Ment Dis Date: 2012-04 Impact factor: 2.254
Authors: R Paredes; A Mocroft; O Kirk; A Lazzarin; S E Barton; J van Lunzen; T L Katzenstein; F Antunes; J D Lundgren; B Clotet Journal: Arch Intern Med Date: 2000-04-24
Authors: F Starace; L Bartoli; M S Aloisi; A Antinori; P Narciso; G Ippolito; L Ravasio; M C Moioli; D Vangi; L Gennero; O V Coronado; A Giacometti; S Nappa; M L Perulli; V Montesarchio; A La Gala; F Ricci; L Cristiano; M De Marco; C Izzo; P Pezzotti; A D'Arminio Monforte Journal: Acta Psychiatr Scand Date: 2002-07 Impact factor: 6.392
Authors: Michael C Diehr; Mariana Cherner; Tanya J Wolfson; S Walden Miller; Igor Grant; Robert K Heaton Journal: J Clin Exp Neuropsychol Date: 2003-06 Impact factor: 2.475
Authors: Steven Paul Woods; Julie D Rippeth; Alan B Frol; Joel K Levy; Elizabeth Ryan; Vicki M Soukup; Charles H Hinkin; Deborah Lazzaretto; Mariana Cherner; Thomas D Marcotte; Benjamin B Gelman; Susan Morgello; Elyse J Singer; Igor Grant; Robert K Heaton Journal: J Clin Exp Neuropsychol Date: 2004-09 Impact factor: 2.475
Authors: Sergio Monteiro de Almeida; Clea Elisa Ribeiro; Ana Paula de Pereira; Jayraan Badiee; Mariana Cherner; Davey Smith; Ingrid Maich; Sonia Mara Raboni; Indianara Rotta; Francisco Jaime Barbosa; Robert K Heaton; Anya Umlauf; Ronald J Ellis Journal: J Neurovirol Date: 2013-11-26 Impact factor: 2.643