Kathryn N Devlin1, Laura Brennan2, Laura Saad3, Tania Giovannetti4, Roy H Hamilton5,6, David A Wolk5,6, Sharon X Xie5,7, Dawn Mechanic-Hamilton5,6. 1. Department of Psychological and Brain Sciences, Drexel University, Philadelphia, PA, USA. 2. Department of Neurology, Thomas Jefferson University Hospital, Philadelphia, PA, USA. 3. Department of Psychology, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, NJ, USA. 4. Department of Psychology, Temple University, Philadelphia, PA, USA. 5. Alzheimer's Disease Research Center, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. 6. Department of Neurology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. 7. Department of Biostatistics, Epidemiology and Informatics, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Actuarial and statistical methods have been proposed as alternatives to conventional methods of diagnosing mild cognitive impairment (MCI), with the aim of enhancing diagnostic and prognostic validity, but have not been compared in racially diverse samples. OBJECTIVE: We compared the agreement of consensus, actuarial, and statistical MCI diagnostic methods, and their relationship to race and prognostic indicators, among diverse older adults. METHODS: Participants (N = 354; M age = 71; 68% White, 29% Black) were diagnosed with MCI or normal cognition (NC) according to clinical consensus, actuarial neuropsychological criteria (Jak/Bondi), and latent class analysis (LCA). We examined associations with race/ethnicity, longitudinal cognitive and functional change, and incident dementia. RESULTS: MCI rates by consensus, actuarial criteria, and LCA were 44%, 53%, and 41%, respectively. LCA identified three MCI subtypes (memory; memory/language; memory/executive) and two NC classes (low normal; high normal). Diagnostic agreement was substantial, but agreement of the actuarial method with consensus and LCA was weaker than the agreement between consensus and LCA. Among cases classified as MCI by actuarial criteria only, Black participants were over-represented, and outcomes were generally similar to those of NC participants. Consensus diagnoses best predicted longitudinal outcomes overall, whereas actuarial diagnoses best predicted longitudinal functional change among Black participants. CONCLUSION: Consensus diagnoses optimize specificity in predicting dementia, but among Black older adults, actuarial diagnoses may be more sensitive to early signs of decline. Results highlight the need for cross-cultural validity in MCI diagnosis and should be explored in community- and population-based samples.
BACKGROUND: Actuarial and statistical methods have been proposed as alternatives to conventional methods of diagnosing mild cognitive impairment (MCI), with the aim of enhancing diagnostic and prognostic validity, but have not been compared in racially diverse samples. OBJECTIVE: We compared the agreement of consensus, actuarial, and statistical MCI diagnostic methods, and their relationship to race and prognostic indicators, among diverse older adults. METHODS: Participants (N = 354; M age = 71; 68% White, 29% Black) were diagnosed with MCI or normal cognition (NC) according to clinical consensus, actuarial neuropsychological criteria (Jak/Bondi), and latent class analysis (LCA). We examined associations with race/ethnicity, longitudinal cognitive and functional change, and incident dementia. RESULTS: MCI rates by consensus, actuarial criteria, and LCA were 44%, 53%, and 41%, respectively. LCA identified three MCI subtypes (memory; memory/language; memory/executive) and two NC classes (low normal; high normal). Diagnostic agreement was substantial, but agreement of the actuarial method with consensus and LCA was weaker than the agreement between consensus and LCA. Among cases classified as MCI by actuarial criteria only, Black participants were over-represented, and outcomes were generally similar to those of NC participants. Consensus diagnoses best predicted longitudinal outcomes overall, whereas actuarial diagnoses best predicted longitudinal functional change among Black participants. CONCLUSION: Consensus diagnoses optimize specificity in predicting dementia, but among Black older adults, actuarial diagnoses may be more sensitive to early signs of decline. Results highlight the need for cross-cultural validity in MCI diagnosis and should be explored in community- and population-based samples.
Authors: Emily C Edmonds; Lisa Delano-Wood; Lindsay R Clark; Amy J Jak; Daniel A Nation; Carrie R McDonald; David J Libon; Rhoda Au; Douglas Galasko; David P Salmon; Mark W Bondi Journal: Alzheimers Dement Date: 2014-05-22 Impact factor: 21.566
Authors: Emily C Edmonds; Alexandra J Weigand; Kelsey R Thomas; Joel Eppig; Lisa Delano-Wood; Douglas R Galasko; David P Salmon; Mark W Bondi Journal: J Int Neuropsychol Soc Date: 2018-09 Impact factor: 2.892
Authors: Marinella Damian; Lucrezia Hausner; Katrin Jekel; Melany Richter; Lutz Froelich; Ove Almkvist; Merce Boada; Roger Bullock; Peter Paul De Deyn; Giovanni B Frisoni; Harald Hampel; Roy W Jones; Patrick Kehoe; Hermine Lenoir; Lennart Minthon; Marcel G M Olde Rikkert; Guido Rodriguez; Philip Scheltens; Hilkka Soininen; Luiza Spiru; Jacques Touchon; Magda Tsolaki; Bruno Vellas; Frans R J Verhey; Bengt Winblad; Lars-Olof Wahlund; Gordon Wilcock; Pieter Jelle Visser Journal: Dement Geriatr Cogn Disord Date: 2013-05-03 Impact factor: 2.959
Authors: Andrea R Zammit; Charles B Hall; Mindy J Katz; Graciela Muniz-Terrera; Ali Ezzati; David A Bennett; Richard B Lipton Journal: J Alzheimers Dis Date: 2018 Impact factor: 4.472