Cited by 274Dementia and Cognitive Impairment ResearchPsychological Testing and AssessmentHistorical and Modern Theater Studies

Neuropsychological tests accurately predict incident Alzheimer disease after 5 and 10 years

Tierney, Mary C., Yao, Christie, Kiss, Alex, McDowell, Ian·2005·Neurology

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether neuropsychological tests accurately predict incident Alzheimer disease (AD) after 5 and 10 years in participants of the Canadian Study of Health and Aging (CSHA) who were initially nondemented. METHODS: The CSHA was conducted in three waves: CSHA-1 (1991 to 1992), CSHA-2 (1996 to 1997), and CSHA-3 (2001 to 2002). The 10-year prediction study included those who completed neuropsychological testing at CSHA-1 and received a diagnostic assessment at CSHA-3 (n = 263). The 5-year prediction study included those who completed neuropsychological testing at CSHA-2 and received a diagnostic assessment at CSHA-3 (n = 551). The diagnostic workup for dementia at CSHA-3 was formulated without knowledge of neuropsychological test performance at CSHA-1 or CSHA-2. The authors excluded cases with a baseline diagnosis of dementia or a prior history of any condition likely to affect the brain. Age and education were included in all analyses as covariates. RESULTS: In the 10-year follow-up study, only one test (short delayed verbal recall) emerged from the forward regression analyses. The model with this test and two covariates was significant, chi2 (3) = 31.61, p < 0.0001 (sensitivity = 73%, specificity = 70%). In the 5-year follow-up study, three tests (short delayed verbal recall, animal fluency, and information) emerged from the forward logistic regression analyses. The model was significant, chi2 (5) = 91.34, p < 0.0001 (sensitivity = 74%, specificity = 83%). Both models were supported with bootstrapping estimates. CONCLUSIONS: In a large epidemiologic sample of nondemented participants, neuropsychological tests accurately predicted conversion to Alzheimer disease after 5 and 10 years.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1212/01.wnl.0000163773.21794.0b

Cites

1 of 1 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

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Tierney, M. C., Yao, C., Kiss, A., & McDowell, I.
Affiliations
Sunnybrook Health Science Centre (CA)
Venue
Neurology
Published
2005-06-14
Volume
64
Issue
11
Pages
1853-1859
ISSN
  • 0028-3878 (ISSN-L)
  • 1526-632X
OpenAlex
W1969713976
Cited by
274
References
1
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 13 · 2020: 12 · 2019: 12 · 2018: 9 · 2017: 12 · 2016: 16 · 2015: 14 · 2014: 20 · 2013: 15 · 2012: 14
FWCI
9.20
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Neurology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Dementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Psychological Testing and Assessment
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Historical and Modern Theater Studies
Keywords
Alzheimer's disease, neuropsychological assessment, conversion to dementia, animal fluency, Canadian Study of Health and Aging, non-demented elderly, sensitivity and specificity
MeSH terms
Age Factors, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Alzheimer Disease, Canada, Dementia, Educational Status, Female, Genetic Testing, Genotype, Health Surveys, Humans, Male, Memory Disorders, Neuropsychological Tests, Predictive Value of Tests, Risk Factors, Sex Factors, Reproducibility of Results, Cohort Studies, Genetic Predisposition to Disease

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