Journal of Neurology

, 254:1359 | Cite as

Measuring cognitive change in older adults. Do reliable change indices of the SIDAM predict dementia?

  • A. Hensel
  • M. C. Angermeyer
  • S. G. Riedel-Heller
ORIGINAL COMMUNICATION

Abstract

Background

In persons free of dementia, accelerated cognitive decline might be an indicator of pathological impairment and a potential predictor of future dementia. However, the reliable detection of cognitive decline is a challenging task in some cases. Changes in psychometric test scores do not necessarily result from ‘true-clinical change and may result from factors like measurement error and regression to the mean. Reliable Change Indices (RCI) facilitate the interpretation of changes in psychometric test scores. However, it is unknown whether RCI predict future dementia in persons who are presently free of dementia.

Aim

To examine for a widely used screening instrument for cognitive impairment and dementia (SIDAM) whether RCI methods contribute to the prediction of dementia diagnosis in older adults who are presently free of dementia.

Methods

A sample of 554 elderly individuals aged 75 and over who participated in the Leipzig Longitudinal Study of the Aged (LEILA 75+) and had no diagnosis of dementia at the first two visits. Participants have been tested with the test part of the SIDAM at maximal six visits with 1.5 year intervals. In all participants, RCI for change in SIDAM score (Time 1 to Time 2) have been computed. The main outcome measure was the diagnosis of dementia.

Results

ROC analyses showed that RCI were significant predictors of future dementia. Participants who deteriorated in SIDAM score - points or more had a three-fold increased risk of developing dementia (odds ratio 2.71, CI 1.6 to 4.6). However, RCI were not independent predictors of dementia in multivariate analysis.

Conclusion

RCI may support the early diagnosis of dementia.

Key words

cognitive change Reliable Change Index SIDAM dementia diagnostic accuracy 

References

  1. 1.
    Altman DG, Bland JM (1994) Diagnostic tests 3: receiver operating characteristic plots. BMJ 309:188PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    American Psychiatric Association (1994) Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders DSM-IV. American Psychiatric Association, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bird CM, Papadopoulou K et al. (2004) Monitoring cognitive changes: Psychometric properties of six cognitive tests. Br J Clin Psychol 43:197-10CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Chelune GJ, Naugle RI et al. (1993) Individual change after epilepsy surgery: Practice effects and base-rate information. Neuropsychology 7:41-2CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Frerichs RJ, Tuokko HA (2005) A comparison of methods for measuring cognitive change in older adults. Arch Clin Neuropsychol 20:321-33CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Hall CB, Lipton RB et al. (2000) A change point model for estimating the onset of cognitive decline in preclinical Alzheimer’s disease. Stat Med 19:1555-566CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Heaton RK, Temkin N et al. (2001) Detecting change: A comparison of three neuropsychological methods, using normal and clinical samples. Arch Clin Neuropsychol 16:75-1PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Hensel A, Angermeyer MC et al. (2007) Measuring cognitive change in older adults. Reliable change indices for the SIDAM. J Neurol 254:91-8CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Hsu LM (1999) Caveats concerning comparisons of change rates obtained with five methods of identifying significant client changes: Comment on Speer and Greenbaum (1995). J Consult Clin Psychol 67:594-98CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Hughes CP, Berg L et al. (1982) A new clinical scale for the staging of dementia. Br J Psychiatry 140:566-72CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Iverson GL (1998) Interpretation of Mini-Mental State Examination scores in community-dwelling elderly and geriatric neuropsychiatry patients. Int J Geriatr Psychiatry 13:661-66CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Iverson GL (2001) Interpreting change on the WAIS-III/WMS-III in clinical samples. Arch Clin Neuropsychol 16:183-91PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Ivnik RJ, Smith GE et al. (1999) Testing normal older people three or four times at 1- to 2-year intervals: Defining normal variance. Neuropsychology 13:121-27CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Ivnik RJ, Smith GE et al. (2000) Diagnostic accuracy of four approaches to interpreting neuropsychological test data. Neuropsychology 14:163-77CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Levine AJ, Miller EN et al. (2004) Normative data for determining significance of test-retest differences on eight common neuropsychological instruments. Clin Neuropsychol 18:373-84CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Marra C, Silveri MC et al. (2000) Predictors of cognitive decline in the early stage of probable Alzheimer’s disease. Dement Geriatr Cogn Disord 11:212-18CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Martin R, Sawrie S et al. (2002) Determining reliable cognitive change after epilepsy surgery: development of reliable change indices and standardized regression-based change norms for the WMS-III and WAIS-III. Epilepsia 43:1551-558CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Radloff LS (1977) The CES-D Scale: A Self-Report Depression Scale for Research in the General Population. Applied Psychological Measurement 1:385-01CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Raymond PD, Hinton-Bayre AD et al. (2006) Test-retest norms and reliable change indices for the MicroCog Battery in a healthy community population over 50 years of age. Clin Neuropsychol 20:261-70CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Reischies FM, Helmchen H (2002) Normales und pathologisches kognitives Altern. In: Beyreuther K et al. (ed) Demenzen. Grundlagen und Klinik. Thieme-Verlag, Stuttgart, pp 1-4Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Riedel-Heller SG, Schork A et al. (2000) Recruitment procedures and their impact on the prevalence of dementia: results from the Leipzig Longitudinal Study of the Aged (LEILA75+). Neuroepidemiology 19:130-40CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Schneekloth U, Potthoff P (1993) Hilfeund Pflegebedürftige in privaten Haushalten. Bericht zur Repräsentativerhebung im Forschungsprojekt "Möglichkeiten und Grenzen selbständiger Lebensführung" [Help and need of care of community dwelling elderly, Results of the representative research project ‘Potentials and limitations of independent living’]. Kohlhammer, StuttgartGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Spitzer RL, Williams JBW et al. (1987) Structured clinical interview for DSMIII- R (SCID). Biometric Research Department, NYS Psychiatric Institute, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Temkin NR, Heaton RK et al. (1999) Detecting significant change in neuropsychological test performance: a comparison of four models. J Int Neuropsychol Soc 5:357-69CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Tombaugh TN (2005) Test-retest reliable coefficients and 5-year change scores for the MMSE and 3MS. Arch Clin Neuropsychol 20:485-03CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Whalley LJ, Dick FD et al. (2006) A lifecourse approach to the aetiology of late-onset dementias. Lancet Neurology 5:87-6CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Zaudig M, Mittelhammer J et al. (1991) SIDAM: A structured interview for the diagnosis of dementia of the Alzheimer type,multi-infarct dementia and dementias of other aetiology according to ICD-10 and DSM-III–R. Psychological Medicine 21:225-36CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Zec RF, Markwell SJ et al. (2005) A longitudinal study of confrontation naming in the “normal-elderly. J Int Neuropsychol Soc 11:716-26CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Steinkopff-Verlag 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • A. Hensel
    • 1
    • 2
  • M. C. Angermeyer
    • 1
  • S. G. Riedel-Heller
    • 1
  1. 1.Dept. of Psychiatry ResearchDepartment of Evaluation and Epidemiology, University of LeipzigLeipzigGermany
  2. 2.Dept. of PsychiatryUniversity of LeipzigLeipzigGermany

Personalised recommendations