Advertisement

Aging Clinical and Experimental Research

, Volume 28, Issue 3, pp 561–565 | Cite as

Qualitative patterns at Raven’s colored progressive matrices in mild cognitive impairment and Alzheimer’s disease

  • Ferdinando Ivano AmbraEmail author
  • Alessandro Iavarone
  • Bruno Ronga
  • Sergio Chieffi
  • Gabriele Carnevale
  • Leonardo Iaccarino
  • Francesco Cimminella
  • Angela Chiavazzo
  • Elisabetta Garofalo
Short Communication

Abstract

Background

Visuo-spatial and problem-solving abilities are commonly impaired in patients with Alzheimer’s disease (AD). Conversely, subjects with amnestic mild cognitive impairment (aMCI) do not exhibit overt involvement of cognitive domains other than memory. Consequently, a detection of an impairment at the Raven’s colored progressive matrices (RCPM) could be useful to discriminate aMCI from AD and to mark the progression from one condition to another.

Aim of the study

To describe the pattern of errors at RCPM in subjects suffering from AD as compared with that of aMCI.

Methods

Fifteen patients with AD, 15 subjects with aMCI and 31 Healthy Controls (HC) received the RCPM. The errors were classified as: (1) difference (D); (2) inadequate individuation (II); (3) repetition of the pattern (RP); (4) incomplete correlation (IC).

Results

No difference approached significance between aMCI subjects and HC. AD patients always exhibited a higher number of errors as compared with HC. AD patients showed higher number of errors as compared with aMCI only on RP and IC errors.

Conclusions

The results suggest that the visuo-spatial and problem-solving impairment that characterize AD, and probably subtend the progression from aMCI to dementia, do not affect to the same extent all cognitive dimensions explored by RCPM.

Keywords

Alzheimer’s disease Cognitive assessment Dementia Mild cognitive impairment Neuropsychology Raven’s progressive matrices 

Notes

Acknowledgments

Authors thank Dr. Camillo Marra for his helpful information about psychometric properties of the MDB.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

On behalf of all authors, the corresponding author states that there is no conflict of interest.

Funding

None of the authors received any funding for this work.

Ethical approval

All procedure performed in studies involving human participant were in accordance with 1964 Helsinki Declaration and its later amendment or comparable ethical standard.

Informed consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

References

  1. 1.
    Petersen RC, Smith GE, Waring SC et al (1999) Mild cognitive impairment: clinical characterization and outcome. Arch Neurol 56:303–308CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Raven JC (1938) Standard progressive matrices: sets A, B, C, D and E. H.K. Lewis, LondonGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Spinnler H, Tognoni G (1987) Standardizzazione e Taratura Italiana di Test Neuropsicologici. Ital J Neurol Sci 8:62–65Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Carlesimo GA, Caltagirone C, Gainotti G, the Group for the Standardization of the Mental Deterioration Battery (1996) The mental deterioration battery: normative data, diagnostic reliability and qualitative analyses of sognitive impairment. Eur Neurol 36:378–384CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Gainotti G, Marra C, Villa G et al (1998) Sensitivity and specificity of some neuropsychological markers of Alzheimer dementia. Alzheimer Dis Assoc Disord 12:152–162CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Belacchi C, Scalisi TG, Cannoni C (2011) CPM—coloured progressive matrices. Standardizzazione Italiana. Prato: Giunti OS Organizzazioni SpecialiGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    McKhann G, Drachman D, Folstein M et al (1984) Clinical diagnosis of Alzheimer’s disease: report of the NINCDS-ADRDA work group under the auspices of Department of Health and Human Services Task Force on Alzheimer’s Disease. Neurology 34:939–944CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Musicco M, Caltagirone C, Sorbi S et al (2004) Italian Neurological Society guidelines for the diagnosis of dementia: revision I. Neurol Sci 25:154–182CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Folstein MF, Folstein SE, McHigh PR (1975) “Mini-mental state”: a practical method for grading the cognitive state of patients for the clinician. J Psychiatric Res 12:189–198CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Measso G, Zappala G, Cavarzeran F et al (1993) Raven’s colored progressive matrices: a normative study of a random sample of healthy adults. Acta Neurol Scand 88:70–74CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Dubois B, Slachevsky A, Litvan I et al (2000) The FAB: frontal Assessment Battery at bed-side. Neurology 55:1621–1626CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Iavarone A, Ronga B, Pellegrino L et al (2004) The frontal assessment battery (FAB): normative data from an Italian sample and performances of patients with Alzheimer’s disease and frontotemporal dementia. Funct Neurol 19:191–195PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Raven J, Raven JC, Court JH (1998) Manual for Raven’s progressive matrices and vocabulary scales. Oxford Psychologists Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    van Herwegen J, Farran E, Annaz D (2011) Item and error analysis on Raven’s Coloured Progressive Matrices in Williams Syndrome. Res Dev Disabil 32:93–99CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ferdinando Ivano Ambra
    • 1
    Email author
  • Alessandro Iavarone
    • 1
  • Bruno Ronga
    • 1
  • Sergio Chieffi
    • 2
  • Gabriele Carnevale
    • 1
  • Leonardo Iaccarino
    • 3
  • Francesco Cimminella
    • 1
  • Angela Chiavazzo
    • 1
  • Elisabetta Garofalo
    • 1
  1. 1.Neurological and Stroke UnitCTO Hospital, AORN “Ospedali Dei Colli”NaplesItaly
  2. 2.Department of Experimental MedicineSecond University of NaplesNaplesItaly
  3. 3.Department of Nuclear MedicineSan Raffaele HospitalMilanItaly

Personalised recommendations