Glyn W Humphreys1, Mihaela D Duta2, Livia Montana3, Nele Demeyere1, Cathal McCrory4, Julia Rohr3, Kathleen Kahn5,6, Stephen Tollman5,6, Lisa Berkman3,5. 1. Department of Experimental Psychology, University of Oxford. 2. Department of Experimental Psychology, University of Oxford. mihaela.duta@psy.ox.ac.uk. 3. Harvard Center for Population and Development Studies, Cambridge, Massachusetts. 4. TILDA, Trinity College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland. 5. MRC-Wits Rural Public Health and Health Transitions Research Unit (Agincourt), School of Public Health, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa. 6. INDEPTH Network, Accra, Ghana.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: 1. Assess validity of the Oxford Cognitive Screen (OCS-Plus), a domain-specific cognitive assessment designed for low-literacy settings, especially in low- and middle-income countries (LMIC); 2. Advance theoretical contributions in cognitive neuroscience in domain-specific cognitive function and cognitive reserve, especially related to dementia. METHOD: In a cross-sectional study of a sample of 1,402 men and women aged 40-79 in the Health and Aging in Africa: A Longitudinal Study of an INDEPTH Community in South Africa (HAALSI), we administered OCS-Plus along with health and sociodemographic assessments. HAALSI is a representative sample of older adults in Agincourt, South Africa contributing to normative understanding of cognition in LMIC. We report measure distributions, construct and external validity of the OCS-Plus. RESULTS: OCS-Plus has excellent construct and external validity. Intra-class correlations between similar basic measures of orientation in OCS-Plus and in HAALSI assessments was 0.79, and groups of people performing well on the OCS-Plus verbal memory also showed superior performance on HAALSI verbal memory. The OCS-Plus scores showed consistent associations with age and education and domain-specific associations with alcohol and depression. Younger respondents and the more educated did better on all assessments. DISCUSSION: The OCS-Plus represents a major methodological advance in dementia studies in LMICs, and enhances understanding of cognitive aging.
OBJECTIVES: 1. Assess validity of the Oxford Cognitive Screen (OCS-Plus), a domain-specific cognitive assessment designed for low-literacy settings, especially in low- and middle-income countries (LMIC); 2. Advance theoretical contributions in cognitive neuroscience in domain-specific cognitive function and cognitive reserve, especially related to dementia. METHOD: In a cross-sectional study of a sample of 1,402 men and women aged 40-79 in the Health and Aging in Africa: A Longitudinal Study of an INDEPTH Community in South Africa (HAALSI), we administered OCS-Plus along with health and sociodemographic assessments. HAALSI is a representative sample of older adults in Agincourt, South Africa contributing to normative understanding of cognition in LMIC. We report measure distributions, construct and external validity of the OCS-Plus. RESULTS: OCS-Plus has excellent construct and external validity. Intra-class correlations between similar basic measures of orientation in OCS-Plus and in HAALSI assessments was 0.79, and groups of people performing well on the OCS-Plus verbal memory also showed superior performance on HAALSI verbal memory. The OCS-Plus scores showed consistent associations with age and education and domain-specific associations with alcohol and depression. Younger respondents and the more educated did better on all assessments. DISCUSSION: The OCS-Plus represents a major methodological advance in dementia studies in LMICs, and enhances understanding of cognitive aging.
Authors: Cleusa P Ferri; Martin Prince; Carol Brayne; Henry Brodaty; Laura Fratiglioni; Mary Ganguli; Kathleen Hall; Kazuo Hasegawa; Hugh Hendrie; Yueqin Huang; Anthony Jorm; Colin Mathers; Paulo R Menezes; Elizabeth Rimmer; Marcia Scazufca Journal: Lancet Date: 2005-12-17 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Amanda Sonnega; Jessica D Faul; Mary Beth Ofstedal; Kenneth M Langa; John W R Phillips; David R Weir Journal: Int J Epidemiol Date: 2014-03-25 Impact factor: 7.196
Authors: Raj N Kalaria; Gladys E Maestre; Raul Arizaga; Robert P Friedland; Doug Galasko; Kathleen Hall; José A Luchsinger; Adesola Ogunniyi; Elaine K Perry; Felix Potocnik; Martin Prince; Robert Stewart; Anders Wimo; Zhen-Xin Zhang; Piero Antuono Journal: Lancet Neurol Date: 2008-07-28 Impact factor: 44.182
Authors: Robert C Kalayjian; Kevin R Robertson; Jeffrey M Albert; Carl J Fichtenbaum; Todd T Brown; Babafemi O Taiwo Journal: J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr Date: 2019-06-01 Impact factor: 3.731
Authors: Lindsay C Kobayashi; Farrah J Mateen; Livia Montana; Ryan G Wagner; Kathleen Kahn; Stephen M Tollman; Lisa F Berkman Journal: Neuroepidemiology Date: 2018-11-26 Impact factor: 3.282
Authors: Lindsay C Kobayashi; Meagan T Farrell; Collin F Payne; Sumaya Mall; Livia Montana; Ryan G Wagner; Kathleen Kahn; Stephen Tollman; Lisa F Berkman Journal: Psychol Aging Date: 2020-07-23
Authors: F Xavier Gómez-Olivé; Livia Montana; Ryan G Wagner; Chodziwadziwa W Kabudula; Julia K Rohr; Kathleen Kahn; Till Bärnighausen; Mark Collinson; David Canning; Thomas Gaziano; Joshua A Salomon; Collin F Payne; Alisha Wade; Stephen M Tollman; Lisa Berkman Journal: Int J Epidemiol Date: 2018-06-01 Impact factor: 7.196
Authors: Lindsay C Kobayashi; M Maria Glymour; Kathleen Kahn; Collin F Payne; Ryan G Wagner; Livia Montana; Farrah J Mateen; Stephen M Tollman; Lisa F Berkman Journal: Soc Sci Med Date: 2017-08-14 Impact factor: 4.634
Authors: Christy A Denckla; Georgina Spies; Robert Heaton; Jennifer Vasterling; Donald Franklin; Kristina J Korte; Courtney Colgan; David C Henderson; Karestan C Koenen; Soraya Seedat Journal: Clin Neuropsychol Date: 2019-04-05 Impact factor: 3.535
Authors: Meagan T Farrell; Lindsay C Kobayashi; Livia Montana; Ryan G Wagner; Nele Demeyere; Lisa Berkman Journal: J Gerontol B Psychol Sci Soc Sci Date: 2020-08-13 Impact factor: 4.077