Cited by 13Dementia and Cognitive Impairment ResearchHistorical and Modern Theater StudiesAlzheimer's disease research and treatments

Cognitive decline in the behavioral variant of frontotemporal dementia

Open access
Diehl-Schmid, Janine, Bornschein, Susanne, Pohl, Corina, Förstl, Hans, Kurz, Alexander, Jahn, Thomas·2011·International Psychogeriatrics

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Only a small number of studies on the natural disease course in behavioral variant frontotemporal dementia (bvFTD) have been conducted. This is surprising because knowledge about the progression of symptoms is a precondition for the design of clinical drug trials. METHODS: The aim of the present study was to examine the cognitive decline of 20 patients with mild bvFTD over one year using the Consortium to Establish a Registry for Alzheimer's Disease - Neuropsychological Assessment Battery (CERAD-NAB). RESULTS: Within an average follow-up interval of 13 months, patient scores declined significantly in the Mini-mental-State-Examination (MMSE) and the CERAD-NAB subtests of naming, verbal and nonverbal memory. No significant changes were found in the CERAD-NAB subtests of category fluency, recognition, and visuoconstruction. The average annualized decline on the MMSE was 4.0 ± 4.9 points. Ceiling effects were detected in Figures Copy, Word List Recognition and Modified Boston Naming Test. Though the included patient group was rather homogeneous regarding severity of dementia, the cognitive changes were very heterogeneous. CONCLUSION: Given the heterogeneity of cognitive decline, the design of a test battery for clinical trials in FTD will be challenging. A cognitive battery should definitely include the MMSE, Word List Learning and Word List Delayed Recall.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1017/s104161021000164x

Cites

39 of 39 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 40 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Diehl-Schmid, J., Bornschein, S., Pohl, C., Förstl, H., Kurz, A., & Jahn, T.
Affiliations
Technical University of Munich (DE)
Venue
International Psychogeriatrics
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2011-03
Volume
23
Issue
2
Pages
230-237
ISSN
1041-6102 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1998278788
Cited by
13
References
40
Citations by year
2025: 2 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 1 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 1 · 2013: 2
FWCI
0.44
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • International Psychogeriatrics (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • mediaTUM – the media and publications repository of the Technical University Munich (Technical University Munich) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Dementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Historical and Modern Theater Studies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Alzheimer's disease research and treatments
Keywords
behavioral variant frontotemporal dementia, cognitive decline, natural disease course, Mini-Mental State Examination, memory impairment, naming, word list learning, delayed recall, ceiling effect
MeSH terms
Cognition Disorders, Educational Status, Humans, Middle Aged, Neuropsychological Tests, Time Factors, Age of Onset, Disease Progression, Frontotemporal Dementia

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review