Recall and recognition subtests of the repeatable battery for the assessment of neuropsychological status and their relationship to biomarkers of Alzheimer's disease

Diagnostic accuracy of BASIC-Q for detection of cognitive impairment in a primary care setting - a cross-validation study

OBJECTIVES

This study aims to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy and reliability of a new, brief questionnaire, 'Brief Assessment of Impaired Cognition- Questionnaire' (BASIC-Q) for detection of cognitive impairment, primarily developed for use in primary care. BASIC-Q has three components: Self-report, Informant report, and Orientation. Self-report and Orientation are completed by the individual and Informant report is answered by a close relative.

METHODS

We included 275 participants ≥ 70 years, without a prior diagnosis of dementia, and with a close relative who agreed to participate as an informant. Participants were included prospectively in 14 general practices in urban and rural Denmark using a convenience sampling method. The Repeatable Battery for the Assessment of Neuropsychological Status (RBANS), the informant-completed Functional Activities Questionnaire (FAQ) and reported memory concern were used as a reference standard for the classification of the participants' cognitive function.

RESULTS

BASIC-Q demonstrated a fair to good diagnostic accuracy to differentiate between people with cognitive impairment and normal cognition with an area under the ROC curve (AUC) of 0.84 (95% CI 0.79-0.89) and a sensitivity and specificity of 0.80 (95% CI 0.72-0.87) and 0.71 (95% CI 0.63-0.78). A prorated BASIC-Q score derived from BASIC-Q without Informant report had significantly lower classification accuracy than the full BASIC-Q. The test-retest reliability of BASIC-Q was good with an intraclass correlation coefficient of 0.84.

CONCLUSION

BASIC-Q is a brief, easy-to-use questionnaire for identification of cognitive impairment in older adults. It demonstrated fair to good classification accuracy in a general practice setting and can be a useful case-finding tool when suspecting dementia in primary health care.

Recognition subtests of the Repeatable Battery for the Assessment of Neuropsychological Status: evidence for a cortical vs. subcortical distinction

INTRODUCTION

Within clinical neuropsychology, a classic diagnostic distinction is made between cortical and subcortical disorders, especially based on their memory profiles. Typically, this is based on the comparison of recall and recognition trials, where individuals with cortical conditions do not tend to benefit (i.e., score well) on recognition trials and individuals with subcortical conditions do. Although the Repeatable Battery for the Assessment of Neuropsychological Status (RBANS) is a widely used brief cognitive battery, there is a lack of evidence to support this measure's utility in distinguishing between the memory profiles of these conditions.

METHOD

Thirty-six mild Alzheimer's disease (AD), 55 Parkinson's disease (PD), and 105 essential tremor (ET) participants (N = 196) were administered the RBANS with additional Story and Figure Recognition subtests. Group differences on recall and recognition scores (Total Correct, Hits or True Positives, False Positive Errors, and discriminability index) were examined across the three groups, while controlling for the influence of age and gender.

RESULTS

As expected, individuals with AD had poorer recognition scores compared to the other clinical groups across tasks (all p-values < .05), while the ET sample largely performed comparably to the PD sample. With the exception of comparable Figure Recognition and Recall in the PD sample, all groups exhibited significantly greater recognition Hit performance compared to Recall (all p-values < .05).

CONCLUSIONS

The group differences in performance across RBANS recognition subtests suggest support for traditional "cortical" and "subcortical" profiles. However, all groups, including the mild AD sample, demonstrated a benefit from recognition cues compared to free recall. Overall, these findings support the inclusion of the newly developed Story and Figure Recognition subtests in future clinical practice and research endeavors.