Helena S Moreira1, César F Lima2, Selene G Vicente3. 1. Faculty of Psychology and Education, University of Porto, Portugal. 2. Faculty of Psychology and Education, University of Porto, Portugal Center for Psychology at University of Porto, Portugal Institute of Cognitive Neuroscience, University College London, London, United Kingdom. 3. Faculty of Psychology and Education, University of Porto, Portugal Center for Psychology at University of Porto, Portugal.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The Institute of Cognitive Neurology (INECO) Frontal Screening (IFS) is a brief neuropsychological tool recently devised for the evaluation of executive dysfunction in neurodegenerative conditions. OBJECTIVE: In this study we present a cross-cultural validation of the IFS for the Portuguese population, provide normative values from a healthy sample, determine how age and education affect performance, and inspect its clinical utility in the context of Alzheimer's disease (AD). A comparison with the Frontal Assessment Battery (FAB) was undertaken, and correlations with other well-established executive functions measures were examined. METHODS: The normative sample included 204 participants varying widely in age (20-85 years) and education (3-21 years). The clinical sample (n = 21) was compared with a sample of age- and education-matched controls (n = 21). Healthy participants completed the IFS and the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE). In addition to these, the patients (and matched controls) completed the FAB and a battery of other executive tests. RESULTS: IFS scores were positively affected by education and MMSE, and negatively affected by age. Patients underperformed controls on the IFS, and correlations were found with the Clock Drawing Test, Stroop test, and the Zoo Map and Rule Shift Card tests of the Behavioral Assessment of the Dysexecutive Syndrome. A cut-off of 17 optimally differentiated patients from controls. While 88% of the IFS sub-tests discriminated patients from controls, only 67% of the FAB sub-tests did so. CONCLUSION: Age and education should be taken into account when interpreting performance on the IFS. The IFS is useful to detect executive dysfunction in AD, showing good discriminant and concurrent validities.
BACKGROUND: The Institute of Cognitive Neurology (INECO) Frontal Screening (IFS) is a brief neuropsychological tool recently devised for the evaluation of executive dysfunction in neurodegenerative conditions. OBJECTIVE: In this study we present a cross-cultural validation of the IFS for the Portuguese population, provide normative values from a healthy sample, determine how age and education affect performance, and inspect its clinical utility in the context of Alzheimer's disease (AD). A comparison with the Frontal Assessment Battery (FAB) was undertaken, and correlations with other well-established executive functions measures were examined. METHODS: The normative sample included 204 participants varying widely in age (20-85 years) and education (3-21 years). The clinical sample (n = 21) was compared with a sample of age- and education-matched controls (n = 21). Healthy participants completed the IFS and the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE). In addition to these, the patients (and matched controls) completed the FAB and a battery of other executive tests. RESULTS: IFS scores were positively affected by education and MMSE, and negatively affected by age. Patients underperformed controls on the IFS, and correlations were found with the Clock Drawing Test, Stroop test, and the Zoo Map and Rule Shift Card tests of the Behavioral Assessment of the Dysexecutive Syndrome. A cut-off of 17 optimally differentiated patients from controls. While 88% of the IFS sub-tests discriminated patients from controls, only 67% of the FAB sub-tests did so. CONCLUSION: Age and education should be taken into account when interpreting performance on the IFS. The IFS is useful to detect executive dysfunction in AD, showing good discriminant and concurrent validities.
Authors: Carina Fernandes; A R Gonçalves; R Pasion; F Ferreira-Santos; F Barbosa; I P Martins; J Marques-Teixeira Journal: Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci Date: 2019-02 Impact factor: 3.282
Authors: Helena S Moreira; Ana S Costa; São L Castro; César F Lima; Selene G Vicente Journal: Front Aging Neurosci Date: 2017-11-09 Impact factor: 5.750
Authors: M Belen Bachli; Lucas Sedeño; Jeremi K Ochab; Olivier Piguet; Fiona Kumfor; Pablo Reyes; Teresa Torralva; María Roca; Juan Felipe Cardona; Cecilia Gonzalez Campo; Eduar Herrera; Andrea Slachevsky; Diana Matallana; Facundo Manes; Adolfo M García; Agustín Ibáñez; Dante R Chialvo Journal: Neuroimage Date: 2019-12-10 Impact factor: 6.556
Authors: Carina Fernandes; Helena Garcez; Senanur Balaban; Fernando Barbosa; Mariana R Pereira; Celeste Silveira; João Marques-Teixeira; Ana R Gonçalves Journal: Front Psychol Date: 2022-06-22
Authors: Helena S Moreira; Ana Sofia Costa; Álvaro Machado; São Luís Castro; César F Lima; Selene G Vicente Journal: PLoS One Date: 2019-09-10 Impact factor: 3.240