Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Objective and subjective memory impairment in elderly adults: a revised version of the Everyday Memory Questionnaire

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Aging Clinical and Experimental Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background and aims: Growing interest in understanding the relationship between subjective memory complaints (SMCs) and objective measures of memory abilities emphasizes the importance of SMC assessment for diagnostic purposes. The present study investigated the relationship between SMCs and objective memory deficits in elderly adults by analysis of the factor structure of the Everyday Memory Questionnaire (EMQ). Methods: Objective and subjective assessment of memory function was carried out in 112 elderly adults. Principal component analysis was then performed to study the factor structure of the EMQ in relation to the assessment. Results: Objective memory impairment was evident in 8.9% of elderly adults. The factor analysis showed that the most interpretable solution to detect objective changes with the EMQ comprised only 20 out of 28 items of the original list, with three factors explaining 48% of total variance. This version was more sensitive for detecting SMCs in elderly adults, since one out of the three factors was able to differentiate subjects with objective memory deficits from those without. Conclusion: Taken together, these results illustrate that this 20-item version of the revised EMQ may serve as an easy-to-use instrument during clinical screening, to evaluate objective memory impairment in individuals who report SMC.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Balota DA, Dolan PO, Duchek JM. Memory changes in healthy order adults. In Tulving E, Craik FIM, Eds. Oxford Handbook of Memory. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000: 395–403.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Spencer WD, Raz N. Differential effects of aging on memory for content and context: a meta-analysis. Psychol Aging 1995; 10: 527–39.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Geerlings MI, Jonker C, Bouter LM, Ader HJ, Schmand B. Association between memory complaints and incident Alzheimer’s disease in elderly people with normal baseline cognition. Am J Psychiatry 1999; 156: 531–7.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Jorm AF, Christensen H, Henderson AS et al. Complaints of cognitive decline in the elderly: a comparison of reports by subjects and informants in a community survey. Psychol Med 1994; 24: 365–74.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Glodzik-Sobanska L, Reisberg B, De Santi S et al. Subjective memory complaints: presence, severity and future outcome in normal older subjects. Dement Geriatr Cogn Disord 2007; 24: 177–84.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Jonker C, Geerlings MI, Schmand B. Are memory complaints predictive for dementia? A review of clinical and population-based studies. Int J Geriatr Psychiatry 2000; 15: 983–91.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Schofield PW, Marder K, Dooneief G et al. Association of subjective memory complaints with subsequent cognitive decline in community-dwelling elderly individuals with baseline cognitive impairment. Am J Psychiatry 1997; 154: 609–15.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Jungwirth S, Fischer P, Weissgram S et al. Subjective memory complaints and objective memory impairment in the Vienna- Transdanube aging community. J Am Geriatr Soc 2004; 52: 263–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Reid LM, Maclullich AM. Subjective memory complaints and cognitive impairment in older people. Dement Geriatr Cogn Disord 2006; 22: 471–85.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Zelinski EM, Gilewski MJ. Assessment of memory complaints by rating scales and questionnaires. Psychopharmacol Bull 1988; 24: 523–9.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Sunderland A, Harris JE, Baddeley AD. Do laboratory tests predict everyday memory? A neuropsychological study. J Verb Learn Verb Behav 1983; 22: 341–57.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Sunderland A. Assessing everyday memory after severe head injury. In Harris JE, Morris PE, Eds. Everyday Memory, Action, and Absent-Mindedness. London: Academic Press, 1984: 193–212.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Sunderland A, Watts K, Baddeley AD, Harris JE. Subjective memory assessment and test performance in elderly adults. J Gerontol 1986; 41: 376–84.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Richardson JT, Chan RC. The constituent structure of subjective memory questionnaires: evidence from multiple sclerosis. Memory 1995; 3: 187–200.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Cornish IM. Factor structure of the everyday memory questionnaire. Br J Psychol 2000; 91: 427–38.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Royle J, Lincoln NB. The Everyday Memory Questionnaire-revised: development of a 13-item scale. Disabil Rehabil 2008; 30: 114–21.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Petersen RC, Knopman DS. MCI is a clinically useful concept. Int Psychogeriatr 2006; 18: 394–402 (discussion 409–414).

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Petersen RC. Mild cognitive impairment as a diagnostic entity. J Intern Med 2004; 256: 183–94.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Petersen RC, Smith GE, Waring SC et al. Mild cognitive impairment: clinical characterization and outcome. Arch Neurol 1999; 56: 303–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Roberts JL, Clare L, Woods RT. Subjective memory complaints and awareness of memory functioning in mild cognitive impairment: a systematic review. Dement Geriatr Cogn Disord 2009; 28: 95–109.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Ravaglia G, Forti P, Maioli F et al. Screening for mild cognitive impairment in elderly ambulatory patients with cognitive complaints. Aging Clin Exp Res 2005; 17: 374–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Basso C, Limongi F, Siviero P et al. Cognitive impairment: classification and open issues. Aging Clin Exp Res 2007; 19: 344–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Folstein MF, Folstein SE, McHugh PR. “Mini-mental state”. A practical method for grading the cognitive state of patients for the clinician. J Psychiatr Res 1975; 12: 189–98.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Novelli G, Papagno CC, Capitani E, Laiacona N, Vallar G, Cappa SF. Tre test clinici di memoria verbale a lungo termine. Archivio di Psicologia Neurologia e Psichiatria 1986: 278–96.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Giovagnoli AR, Del Pesce M, Mascheroni S, et al. Trail making test: normative values from 287 normal adult controls. Ital J Neurol Sci 1996; 17: 305–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Lezak M, Howieson D, Loring DW. Neuropsychological Assessment (4th ed). Oxford: University Press, 2004.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Spinnler H, Tognoni P. Standardizzazione e taratura italiana di test neuropsicologici. Ital J Neurol Sci 1987; 6: 44–6.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Cattell R. The Scientific Use of Factor Analysis in the Behavioural and Life Sciences. New York: Plenum, 1978.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  29. Kumar R, Dear KB, Christensen H et al. Prevalence of mild cognitive impairment in 60- to 64-year-old community-dwelling individuals: The Personality and Total Health through Life 60+ Study. Dement Geriatr Cogn Disord 2005; 19: 67–74.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Kivipelto M, Helkala EL, Hanninen T et al. Midlife vascular risk factors and late-life mild cognitive impairment: a populationbased study. Neurology 2001; 56: 1683–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Frisoni GB, Fratiglioni L, Fastbom J et al. Mild cognitive impairment in the population and physical health: data on 1,435 individuals aged 75 to 95. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci 2000; 55: M322–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Clarnette RM, Almeida OP, Forstl H, Paton A, Martins RN. Clinical characteristics of individuals with subjective memory loss in Western Australia: results from a cross-sectional survey. Int J Geriatr Psychiatry 2001; 16: 168–74.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Riedel-Heller SG, Matschinger H, Schork A, Angermeyer MC. Do memory complaints indicate the presence of cognitive impairment? Results of a field study. Eur Arch Psychiatry Clin Neurosci 1999; 249: 197–204.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Technology, Universitat Pompeu Fabra, Barcelona, Spain

    Marco Calabria

  2. IRCCS Centro San Giovanni di Dio Fatebenefratelli, Via Pilastroni 4, 25125, Brescia, Italy

    Rosa Manenti, Sandra Rosini, Orazio Zanetti, Carlo Miniussi & Maria Cotelli PhD

  3. Department of Biomedical Sciences and Biotechnologies and National Institute of Neuroscience, University of Brescia, Brescia, Italy

    Carlo Miniussi

Authors
  1. Marco Calabria
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Rosa Manenti
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Sandra Rosini
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Orazio Zanetti
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Carlo Miniussi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Maria Cotelli PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Maria Cotelli PhD.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Calabria, M., Manenti, R., Rosini, S. et al. Objective and subjective memory impairment in elderly adults: a revised version of the Everyday Memory Questionnaire. Aging Clin Exp Res 23, 67–73 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03324954

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03324954

Key words

Key words

Search

Navigation