OBJECTIVE: The Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) is a brief screening measure commonly used to determine cognitive status among older adults. Despite the popularity of the MoCA, there has been little research into how performance on the MoCA changes over time in healthy older adults. METHODS: The present study examined a sample of older adults (n = 53) recruited for a longitudinal study of healthy aging. Change in total MoCA score at three time points (baseline, 12 months, and 48 months) and scores from the Repeatable Battery for the Assessment of Neuropsychological Status at five time points (RBANS; baseline 12 months, 24 months, 36 months, and 48 months) were assessed using repeated measures analyses. RESULTS: Total MoCA score significantly increased across time, particularly between the first and second administrations. Scores did not significantly differ between the second (12 month) and third (48 month) administrations. When grouped by baseline performance, individuals who scored low at baseline significantly improved performance at 12-month testing, but had little change between 12- and 48-month testing. Conversely, individuals who scored high at baseline did not significantly change between baseline and 12-month testing, but improved between 12- and 48-month testing. RBANS scores did not significantly change over time. CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that the MoCA may be susceptible to practice effects, particularly between the first and second administrations. These practice effects should be taken into consideration when repeatedly employing the MoCA to screen for cognitive status in healthy older adults.
OBJECTIVE: The Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) is a brief screening measure commonly used to determine cognitive status among older adults. Despite the popularity of the MoCA, there has been little research into how performance on the MoCA changes over time in healthy older adults. METHODS: The present study examined a sample of older adults (n = 53) recruited for a longitudinal study of healthy aging. Change in total MoCA score at three time points (baseline, 12 months, and 48 months) and scores from the Repeatable Battery for the Assessment of Neuropsychological Status at five time points (RBANS; baseline 12 months, 24 months, 36 months, and 48 months) were assessed using repeated measures analyses. RESULTS: Total MoCA score significantly increased across time, particularly between the first and second administrations. Scores did not significantly differ between the second (12 month) and third (48 month) administrations. When grouped by baseline performance, individuals who scored low at baseline significantly improved performance at 12-month testing, but had little change between 12- and 48-month testing. Conversely, individuals who scored high at baseline did not significantly change between baseline and 12-month testing, but improved between 12- and 48-month testing. RBANS scores did not significantly change over time. CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that the MoCA may be susceptible to practice effects, particularly between the first and second administrations. These practice effects should be taken into consideration when repeatedly employing the MoCA to screen for cognitive status in healthy older adults.
Entities:
Keywords:
Aging; MoCA.; Neuropsychological assessment; Practice effects
Authors: Kevin Duff; Leigh J Beglinger; Mike R Schoenberg; Doyle E Patton; James Mold; James G Scott; Russell L Adams Journal: J Clin Exp Neuropsychol Date: 2005-07 Impact factor: 2.475
Authors: Ziad S Nasreddine; Natalie A Phillips; Valérie Bédirian; Simon Charbonneau; Victor Whitehead; Isabelle Collin; Jeffrey L Cummings; Howard Chertkow Journal: J Am Geriatr Soc Date: 2005-04 Impact factor: 5.562
Authors: Eng A Toh; Michael R MacAskill; John C Dalrymple-Alford; Daniel J Myall; Leslie Livingston; Sandy Ad Macleod; Tim J Anderson Journal: Transl Neurodegener Date: 2014-07-12 Impact factor: 8.014
Authors: Dustin B Hammers; Taylor J Atkinson; Bonnie C A Dalley; Kayla R Suhrie; Britney E Beardmore; Lance D Burrell; Kevin P Horn; Kelli M Rasmussen; Norman L Foster; Kevin Duff; John M Hoffman Journal: Clin Neuropsychol Date: 2017-01-12 Impact factor: 3.535
Authors: Michael Malek-Ahmadi; Kathy O'Connor; Sharon Schofield; David W Coon; Edward Zamrini Journal: Aging Clin Exp Res Date: 2017-11-29 Impact factor: 3.636
Authors: Annes J Claes; Suzanne de Backer; Paul Van de Heyning; Annick Gilles; Vincent Van Rompaey; Griet Mertens Journal: Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol Date: 2018-04-18 Impact factor: 2.503
Authors: Achinoam Faust-Socher; Sarah Duff-Canning; Arthur Grabovsky; Melissa J Armstrong; Brandon Rothberg; Paul J Eslinger; Christopher A Meaney; Ruth B Schneider; David F Tang-Wai; Susan H Fox; Cindy Zadikoff; Nancy Kennedy; Kelvin L Chou; Carol Persad; Irene Litvan; Benjamin T Mast; Adam T Gerstenecker; Sandra Weintraub; William Reginold; Connie Marras Journal: Dement Geriatr Cogn Disord Date: 2019-07-17 Impact factor: 2.959
Authors: Kevin Duff; Kayla R Suhrie; Dustin B Hammers; Ava M Dixon; Jace B King; Vincent Koppelmans; John M Hoffman Journal: Clin Neuropsychol Date: 2021-10-29 Impact factor: 4.373
Authors: Esther C McWilliams; Florentine M Barbey; John F Dyer; Md Nurul Islam; Bernadette McGuinness; Brian Murphy; Hugh Nolan; Peter Passmore; Laura M Rueda-Delgado; Alison R Buick Journal: Front Psychiatry Date: 2021-06-25 Impact factor: 4.157