OBJECTIVE: Royall and colleagues identified a latent dementia phenotype, "δ", reflecting the "cognitive correlates of functional status." We sought to cross-validate and extend these findings in a large clinical case series of adults with and without dementia. METHOD: A confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) model for δ was fit to National Alzheimer's Coordinating Center data (n = 26,068). Factor scores derived from δ were compared with the Clinical Dementia Rating Sum of Boxes (CDR-SB) and to clinically diagnosed dementia. A longitudinal parallel-process growth model compared changes in δ with changes in CDR-SB over 6 annual evaluations. RESULTS: The CFA model fit well; CFI = 0.971, RMSEA = 0.070. Factor scores derived from δ discriminated between demented and nondemented participants with an area under the curve of .96. The growth model also fit well, CFI = 0.969, RMSEA = 0.032. CONCLUSIONS: The δ construct represents a novel approach to measuring dementia-related changes and has potential to improve cognitive assessment of neurodegenerative diseases. (c) 2015 APA, all rights reserved).
OBJECTIVE: Royall and colleagues identified a latent dementia phenotype, "δ", reflecting the "cognitive correlates of functional status." We sought to cross-validate and extend these findings in a large clinical case series of adults with and without dementia. METHOD: A confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) model for δ was fit to National Alzheimer's Coordinating Center data (n = 26,068). Factor scores derived from δ were compared with the Clinical Dementia Rating Sum of Boxes (CDR-SB) and to clinically diagnosed dementia. A longitudinal parallel-process growth model compared changes in δ with changes in CDR-SB over 6 annual evaluations. RESULTS: The CFA model fit well; CFI = 0.971, RMSEA = 0.070. Factor scores derived from δ discriminated between demented and nondemented participants with an area under the curve of .96. The growth model also fit well, CFI = 0.969, RMSEA = 0.032. CONCLUSIONS: The δ construct represents a novel approach to measuring dementia-related changes and has potential to improve cognitive assessment of neurodegenerative diseases. (c) 2015 APA, all rights reserved).
Authors: Donald R Royall; Edward C Lauterbach; Daniel Kaufer; Paul Malloy; Kerry L Coburn; Kevin J Black Journal: J Neuropsychiatry Clin Neurosci Date: 2007 Impact factor: 2.198
Authors: John C Morris; Sandra Weintraub; Helena C Chui; Jeffrey Cummings; Charles Decarli; Steven Ferris; Norman L Foster; Douglas Galasko; Neill Graff-Radford; Elaine R Peskind; Duane Beekly; Erin M Ramos; Walter A Kukull Journal: Alzheimer Dis Assoc Disord Date: 2006 Oct-Dec Impact factor: 2.703
Authors: Diane B Howieson; Nichole E Carlson; M Milar Moore; Dara Wasserman; Cena D Abendroth; Jessica Payne-Murphy; Jeffrey A Kaye Journal: J Int Neuropsychol Soc Date: 2008-03 Impact factor: 2.892
Authors: Laura A Rabin; Nadia Paré; Andrew J Saykin; Michael J Brown; Heather A Wishart; Laura A Flashman; Robert B Santulli Journal: Neuropsychol Dev Cogn B Aging Neuropsychol Cogn Date: 2009-04-07
Authors: Duane L Beekly; Erin M Ramos; William W Lee; Woodrow D Deitrich; Mary E Jacka; Joylee Wu; Janene L Hubbard; Thomas D Koepsell; John C Morris; Walter A Kukull Journal: Alzheimer Dis Assoc Disord Date: 2007 Jul-Sep Impact factor: 2.703
Authors: B L Plassman; K M Langa; G G Fisher; S G Heeringa; D R Weir; M B Ofstedal; J R Burke; M D Hurd; G G Potter; W L Rodgers; D C Steffens; R J Willis; R B Wallace Journal: Neuroepidemiology Date: 2007-10-29 Impact factor: 3.282
Authors: Samantha E John; Ashita S Gurnani; Cara Bussell; Jessica L Saurman; Jason W Griffin; Brandon E Gavett Journal: Neuropsychology Date: 2016-11 Impact factor: 3.295
Authors: Brandon E Gavett; Samantha E John; Ashita S Gurnani; Cara A Bussell; Jessica L Saurman Journal: J Alzheimers Dis Date: 2016 Impact factor: 4.472