The Tower of London Test: Different Scoring Criteria for Diagnosing Alzheimer's Disease and Mild Cognitive Impairment

Author:

de Paula Jonas Jardim,Moreira Lafaiete1,Nicolato Rodrigo2,De Marco Luiz Armando2,Côrrea Humberto2,Romano-Silva Marco Aurélio2,De Moraes Edgar Nunes,Bicalho Maria Aparecida3,Malloy-Diniz Leandro Fernandes4

Affiliation:

1. Laboratory of Neuropsychological Investigations (LIN), INCT de Medicina Molecular, Faculdade de Medicina, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais

2. Molecular Medicine Program, School of Medicine, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais (UFMG), INCT de Medicina Molecular, Faculdade de Medicina, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais

3. Geriatric and Gerontology Center, Clinics Hospital, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, INCT de Medicina Molecular, Faculdade de Medicina, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais

4. Department of Mental Health, School of Medicine, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Laboratory of Neuropsychological Investigations (LIN), INCT de Medicina Molecular, Faculdade de Medicina, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais

Abstract

The Tower of London (TOL) is used for evaluating planning skills, which is a component of the executive functions. Different versions and scoring criteria were developed for this task, and some of them present with different psychometrical properties. This study aimed to evaluate two specific scoring methods of the TOL in diagnosing Mild Cognitive Impairment and probable Alzheimer's disease. The TOL total scores from 60 patients of each diagnosis were compared with the performance of 60 healthy-aged controls using receiver operating characteristics analysis and multinomial logistic regression. Krikorian method better diagnosed Alzheimer's disease, while Portellas's was better at discriminating healthy controls from Mild Cognitive Impairment, but were not efficient at comparing this last group with Alzheimer's patients. Regression analysis indicates that in addition to screening tests, TOL improves the classification of the three groups. The results suggest the two scoring methods used for this task may be useful for different diagnostic purposes.

Publisher

SAGE Publications

Subject

General Psychology

Cited by 18 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3