The Cordoba Naming Test (CNT) is a 30-item confrontation naming test developed in Argentina. A common confrontation naming task used in the United States is the Boston Naming Test (BNT). Research shows that age affects BNT performance in the 60-item long form. In fact, studies show that scores on confrontation naming tasks increase in childhood and continue to improve until approximately 40 years of age. However, after this period, scores start to subsequently decline, and especially so after 70 years of age. On the other hand, some studies have reported that older adults maintain high BNT performance despite advancing age. To our knowledge, no study has investigated the aging effects of the CNT across various age groups. We expected CNT scores to increase significantly from young adulthood to mid-adulthood and then significantly decline with advancing age.

The present study sample consisted of 272 neurologically and psychologically healthy participants with a mean age of 27.06 (SD = 12.21) with 14.29 years of education completed (SD = 2.46). Participants were divided into six different age groups: 18-19-year-old group, 20-29-year-old group, 30-39-year-old group, 40-49-year-old group, 50-59-year-old group, and 60-69-year-old group. All participants consented to voluntary participation and completed the CNT and a comprehensive background questionnaire in English. The CNT consisted of 30 black and white line drawings, ranging from easy to hard difficulty. An ANCOVA, controlling for gender, was used to evaluate CNT performance between the six age groups. We used a threshold of p < .05 for statistical significance.

Results revealed significant group differences between the six age groups on the CNT, p = .000, ηp2 = .14. A post-hoc test revealed that the 30-39-year-old group outperformed the 18-19-year-old, 20-29-yearold, and 60-69-year-old groups on the CNT. Finally, the 40-49-year-old group outperformed the 18-19-year-old and 60-69-year-old groups on the CNT.

As we predicted, participants demonstrated steady improvement in the CNT until the age of 40. However, we found that until the age of 60, CNT performance started to decline significantly. Our data suggests that CNT performance declines significantly at the age of 60 compared to previous research using the BNT. Research shows other demographic variables (e.g., gender, linguistic factors) influence BNT performance. Future investigations on the CNT using a healthy sample should use a multivariate statistical analysis method to help explain influencing factors across aging. This research can have the potential to improve public health to better support and understand individuals from diverse backgrounds.

The global prevalence of persons living with dementia will soon exceed 50 million. Most of these individuals reside in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). In South Africa, one such LMIC, the physician-to-patient ratio of 9:10 000 severely limits the capacity of clinicians to screen, assess, diagnose, and treat dementias. One way to address this limitation is by using mobile health (mHealth) platforms to scale-up neurocognitive testing. In this paper, we describe one such platform, a brief tablet-based cognitive assessment tool (NeuroScreen) that can be administered by lay health-providers. It may help identify patients with cognitive impairment (related, for instance, to dementia) and thereby improve clinical care and outcomes. However, there is a lack of data regarding (a) the acceptability of this novel technology for delivery of neurocognitive assessments in LMIC-resident older adults, and (b) the influence of technology-use experience on NeuroScreen performance of LMIC-resident older adults. This study aimed to fill that knowledge gap, using a sample of cognitively impaired South African older adults.

Participants were 60 older adults (63.33% female; 91.67% right-handed; age M = 68.90 years, SD = 9.42, range = 50-83), all recruited from geriatric and memory clinics in Cape Town, South Africa. In a single 1-hour session, they completed the entire NeuroScreen battery (Trail Making, Number Speed, Finger Tapping, Visual Discrimination, Number Span Forward, Number Span Backward, List Learning, List Recall) as well as a study-specific questionnaire assessing acceptability of NeuroScreen use and overall experience and comfort with computer-based technology. We summed across 11 questionnaire items to derive a single variable capturing technology-use experience, with higher scores indicating more experience.

Almost all participants (93.33%) indicated that NeuroScreen was easy to use. A similar number (90.00%) indicated they would be comfortable completing NeuroScreen at routine doctor's visits. Only 6.67% reported feeling uncomfortable using a tablet, despite about three-quarters (76.67%) reporting never having used a tablet with a touchscreen before. Almost one in five participants (18.33%) reported owning a computer, 10.00% a tablet, and 70.00% a smartphone. Correlations between test performance and technology-use experience were statistically significant (or strongly tended toward significance) for most NeuroScreen subtests that assessed higherorder cognitive functioning and that required the participant to manipulate the tablet themselves: Trail Making 2 (a measure of cognitive switching ability), r = .24, p = .05; Visual Discrimination A (complex processing speed [number-symbol matching]), r = .38, p = .002; Visual Discrimination B (pattern recognition), r = .37, p = .004; Number Speed (simple information processing speed), r = .36, p = .004. For the most part, there were no such significant associations when the NeuroScreen subtest required only verbal input from the participant (i.e., on the list learning and number span tasks).

NeuroScreen, a tablet-based neurocognitive screening tool, appears feasible for use among older South Africans, even if they are cognitively impaired and have limited technological familiarity. However, test performance might be influenced by amount of technology-use experience; clinicians using the battery must consider this in their interpretations.

Despite the rise in literacy, 773 million of the global population is estimated to be illiterate. The rate of illiteracy is even higher among women and older adults (OA). Literacy has been well documented to impact cognitive skills, and most neuropsychological tests developed are for individuals with higher education. Moreover, there is sparse research on cognitive process and performance of illiterate individuals across cognitive domains.

Per a 2011 census, the illiteracy rate in the Indian older adult population was as high as 56%, and within this group, women and older adults in rural regions were especially vulnerable. Thus, it is important to understand cognitive performance of illiterate Indian older adult population, especially when they are being assessed for neurodegenerative disorders.

This study used subset of data from Harmonized Longitudinal Aging Study of India, Diagnostic Assessment of Dementia (LASI DAD), which was developed by the Gateway to Global Aging Data. A sample of cognitive healthy OA (n = 715) was selected based on Hindi Mental Status Exam score of >19 and a Clinical Dementia Rating Scale of 0 (literate = 419, illiterate = 296). Given the heterogeneity of the population, adapted cognitive instruments were used. This study compared memory performances, using word list and constructional praxis with delayed recall tasks, of OA based on their literacy status (illiterate vs. literate).

Literate cognitive healthy OA (M = 15.27, SD = 3.9) learned more words over three trials than illiterate OA (M = 12.17, SD = 3.7) on a world list task, a statistically significant difference (M = 3.1, 95% CI [2.5, 3.6], t (713) = 10.62, p<0.05. Literate OA (M = 8.7, SD = 2.2) had higher scores on task of copy of simple geometrical figures than illiterate OA (M = 5.3, SD = 2.8), a statistically significant difference (M = 3.3, 95% CI [2.9, 3.7], t (713) = 7.1, p<0.05. Literate OA (M = 4.5, SD = 1.8) also recalled more words than illiterate OA (M = 3.6, SD = 2.1) after a delay. Recall of geometric figures after a delay was higher for literate OA (M = 5, SD = 2.9) as well compared to illiterate OA (M = 2.4, SD = 2.5).

Conclusion: In a sample of cognitively healthy Indian older adults, literate OA consistently performed better than illiterate OA on both verbal and nonverbal memory measures. This is consistent with past literature which shows that illiterate individuals take longer to learn verbal information and have lower recall. Additionally, use of geometric figure may be complicated for these individuals. These are important considerations when assessing an OA for memory problems with low or no education. Next steps would be to look at differences across other cognitive domains and also examining if cognitive differences exist in illiterate OA based on gender.

Presurgical psychological screening (PPS) is a procedure for mitigating possible unfavorable outcomes after spinal surgery. Although the effectiveness of PPS on degenerative spinal diseases has been investigated in Western studies, a potential cultural influence on PPS is still unknown. This study thus aims to explore the experiences of Taiwanese people before spinal surgery and tries to establish culture-specific components of PPS in Taiwan.

A total of five participants aged from 44–69 with degenerative spinal diseases were eligible in this study. All participants visited a neurosurgical outpatient clinic for potential surgical treatment, and each participant underwent an one-hour semi-structured interview before surgery. The demographical information, medical history, psychological status (e.g., personality traits and emotional disturbances) and considerations to make a surgical decision, were recorded and further analyzed following the rule of grounded theory.

Four major components with 21 sub-components were reported when deciding to receive a surgical treatment for their spinal diseases, including disease-related considerations, medical information, self-concept and interpersonal relations. In terms of disease-related aspects, patients concerned about etiology, symptomatology, impacts, coping strategies and rehabilitation methods. As for medical information, patients paid more attention on medical compliance, the relationship with medical system, attitude for treatment, expectation to surgical outcomes, medical decisions and medical information. As for the self-concept, patients considered more on the impacts of disease on self-concept, strategies of emotional regulations and personality traits. In terms of interpersonal relations, patients reported more on the supportive resources, patterns of interpersonal activities and impacts of interpersonal relations on medical decisions. Additionally, other specific factors, such as past negative experiences (e.g., chronic insomnia, experiences of psychological counseling), litigation, physical punishment in childhood and social roles, were also reported.

Like previous findings, our results supported that the interpersonal relations and doctor-patient relationship in PPS were important considerations before surgery, while we further evidenced that influences of family members on medical decision is determinant and unique in this culture.

Research on healthcare disparities has found that racial and ethnic minority population were less likely to receive intensive and effective rehabilitation following an acquired brain injury compared to their White counterparts. Immigrant status and language barriers further perpetuate the disparities in access to rehabilitation care. In addition to institutional barriers such as absence of culturally and linguistically appropriate health materials as well as lack of cultural competency training for staff, patient factors such as dissonance in cultural value orientation to health care has been identified as a common culturally-mediated barrier accounting for lower healthcare utilization rate among immigrants. Cultural factors including health beliefs and values impact patient’s self-appraisal of illness and have been studied as significant predictors for treatment adherence. The present case study seeks to demonstrate the role of socio-cultural factors in shaping the course of a Chinese immigrant patient’s neuropsychological evaluation and cognitive rehabilitation following an aneurysm rupture and subarachnoid hemorrhage.

The patient is a 64-year-old, monolingual Mandarin-speaking female who was born and raised in mainland China, referred for neuropsychological evaluation for treatment planning following an anterior communicating artery aneurysm rupture and subarachnoid hemorrhage. Cognitive complaints included selective retrograde amnesia and difficulty with short-term episodic memory. Patient completed neuropsychological assessment, then underwent a course of time-limited cognitive remediation.

Neuropsychological assessment was administered in Mandarin Chinese, and the majority of the tests utilized available norms from Mandarin-speaking Chinese population. While the patient continued to demonstrate at or above average functioning in aspects of executive function, she exhibited a pattern of “rapid forgetting” on modality-nonspecific learning and memory in addition to reductions in attention, working memory, psychomotor speed and visuo-perceptual integration. In the absence of mood symptoms, the patient demonstrated emotional resilience and strong family support system. Given reportedly minimal benefits from prior SLP intervention, barriers to treatment were examined and considered: linguistic factor, difficulty in holding on to information due to anterograde amnesia, and the lack of family involvement in the treatment process. In the context of Chinese family system and immigration history, family-centered care is imperative for the patient’s rehabilitation process. Main treatment goals included improving awareness of cognitive deficits as well as reinforcing consistent use of external strategies to compensate for impaired orientation and memory. Flexibility in the use of evidenced-based interventions were emphasized. The patient’s family were counselled in a culturally competent manner to further understand the aspects that matter the most for the patient and incorporate multi-sensory learning to facilitate intervention.

In this case study, we utilized culturally and linguistically appropriate norms and critically examined barriers to treatment from a contextual lens. This case highlights the role of culturally competent neuropsychological evaluation and incorporating a strength-based and multi-method approach in informing treatment planning for cognitive rehabilitation with immigrant population. Given the dearth in the existing cross-cultural literature, there is a clear need to conduct high-quality research in under-studied and under-represented immigrant populations to reduce the gap in service delivery and enhance treatment effectiveness.

Alzheimer’s disease (AD) clinical trials lack diverse representation, limiting their generalizability. In addition, the clinical meaningfulness of observed changes during treatment may vary as a function of participant characteristics. Defining meaningful change in AD within diverse ethnoracial groups is therefore greatly needed. Meaningful change in AD trials can be assessed by three different anchors: participants, informants, or clinicians. Previous research has suggested that estimations of the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) vary by disease severity, choice of anchor, and anchor agreement. These relationships have been studied primarily within non-Hispanic white (NHW) samples. This project evaluates anchor-based MCID within and across the three most prevalent ethnoracial groups in the United States, non-Hispanic White (NHW), Hispanic/Latino (H/L), and Black/African-American (B/AA).

Data from the National Alzheimer’s Coordinating Center Uniform Dataset (NACC UDS) were used to investigate MCID within older adults (ages 50+) diagnosed as cognitively normal or cognitively impaired due to suspected AD. Data were taken from all versions of the UDS and consisted of all available participants with two consecutive annual visits. The identified sample (N=22,043) is approximately 83.6% NHW, 4.7% H/L, and 11.7% B/AA. Participant, informant, and clinician anchor variables were utilized to compare proportions of anchor agreement within and across ethnoracial groups. MCID on the Mini-Mental State Exam (MMSE) was estimated within each ethnoracial group and compared across the independent variables of anchor agreement and disease severity (cognitively normal (CN), mild cognitive impairment (MCI), and dementia) in 2x3 ANOVAs.

Participant age (M = 71.56, SD = 9.03) did not significantly differ across ethnoracial groups; years of education significantly differed across groups, p < .001, with NHW (M=15.83 SD=3.05), H/L (M=12.49, SD=5.01), and B/AA (M=14.42, SD=3.22). Across all three anchors (participant, informant, clinician), unanimous agreement about the presence or absence of a decline in functioning was present in about 75.1% of the full sample. To further explore agreement differences across groups, anchor agreement was classified into a 3-level variable: 1) agreement that the participant remained stable over time, 2) agreement that the participant declined, and 3) disagreement. The proportion of each level within each ethnoracial group was significantly different, (x2(4, n = 22,043) = 179.16, p < .001, phi = .09, NHW (34.5% agreement-stable, 41.4% agreement-declined, 24.1% disagreement), H/L (30.5%, 42.6%, 26.9%, respectively), and B/AA (42.2%, 28.1%, 29.7%, respectively). MCID estimates on the MMSE followed similar trends within each ethnoracial group. There was a significant main effect of disease severity, such that MCID estimates increased in magnitude with increasing disease severity. There were no significant main effects of anchor agreement for any ethnoracial group. Within the NHW sample only, an interaction effect between diagnostic severity and anchor agreement was significant (p = .007).

Across ethnoracial groups, MCID estimates on the MMSE are reliably influenced by the severity of disease. However, the benefit of anchor-based MCID estimates may vary by ethnoracial group with respect to both anchor choice and use of anchor agreement. The origins of anchor disagreement and perceived stability in functioning warrant further exploration.

Despite the array of neuropsychological tests available, these assessments are largely made and developed for use in WEIRD (western, educated, industrialized, rich, democratic) societies (Fernandez, 2019; Ponsford, 2017). The Multicultural Neuropsychological Scale (MUNS) was developed with underrepresented groups in mind as a universally valid neuropsychological assessment which can be used across cultures and adapted to different languages. To assist with the validation of the MUNS as a cross-cultural instrument, investigators administered the MUNS to a cognitively 'healthy’ college-aged population in the United States as a means of collecting normative data. Results were compared to samples taken from an Argentine university, Universidad Catelica de Cerdoba, and combined with another American university, Marymount Loyola University. The goal of this comparison was to provide evidence supporting the validity of the MUNS as a universal, cross-cultural neuropsychological assessment battery.

Students from James Madison University (JMU) in Harrisonburg, Virginia (N = 24, Age = 20.083 1.93, Female = 87.5%) were recruited via a campus-wide email. Students who met inclusionary criteria were selected for MUNS administration. Students completed a background questionnaire and effort measure (REY-15; Rey, 1964) before completing the MUNS battery, consisting of eight subtests with four delayed trials. Descriptive statistics of the group were assessed, and one-way ANOVAs were conducted on the various subtests to determine whether differences exist between the American and Argentine samples.

No significant difference between groups was found for seven subtests. A difference existed on the Attention subtest between the American (f (1, 106) = 45.409, p < .001).

The results show support for the cross-cultural validity of the MUNS. The only significant difference was found in the Arrows (Old) subtest. This is in alignment with previous administrations of the MUNS (Fernandez et al., 2018). Further studies are needed to assess potential bias within this subtest, as well as to pursue comparison studies for the New Arrows subtest administered within this USA sample. The present findings provide further evidence that the MUNS can be applied as a neuropsychological assessment across a variety of populations.

Visuospatial skills are frequently assessed with drawing tests. Research has suggested that the use of drawing tasks in low educated groups may lack the ability to discriminate healthy individuals from clinical populations. The aims of this study were to investigate the validity of visuoconstructional tests in a sample of older Greek Australian immigrants and compare their performances to a matched sample of patients with Alzheimer’s disease (AD).

We assessed visuoconstructional performances in a sample of 90 healthy older Greek Australians, with a primary school level of education, and compared performances to a demographically matched sample of 20 Greek Australians with a diagnosis of AD on four visuoconstructional drawing tests: Greek cross, four-pointed star, intersecting pentagons, and the Necker Cube.

While healthy participants tended to outperform the AD group on most copy tasks, high fail rates within the healthy sample were observed for the intersecting pentagons and Necker cube (78% and 73% fail rates respectively) when using established clinical cutoff scores. High rates of curved angle, omission, distorted relation between elements, spatial disorganization and three-dimensional design errors were found across the four-pointed star, intersecting pentagons, and the Necker cube in both healthy participants and those with AD. Exploratory receiver operating characteristic curve analysis revealed that, with perhaps the exception of the Greek cross, meaningful sensitivity and specificity could not be reached for the four-pointed star, intersecting pentagons, and Necker cube.

Cognitively healthy immigrants with low education appear to be at a disadvantage when completing visuoconstructional drawing tests, as their performance may be misinterpreted as indicating cognitive impairment. Future research is needed to identify alternative approaches to assess visuoconstructional ability in low education older cohorts.

Measures of clinical significance are critical for meaningful interpretation of treatment outcome research on Alzheimer’s disease. A common method of quantifying clinical significance is to calculate a minimal clinically important difference (MCID), which represents the smallest numerical change on an outcome measure that corresponds to an added benefit in a patient’s life. Often the MCID is calculated based on an anchor response. Individuals who report a meaningful change serve as the “anchors”, and the mean level of change for this group serves as the MCID. In research on Alzheimer’s disease, there are several possible raters to provide anchors, including patients, family observers, and clinicians, who may or may not agree on whether there has been a meaningful change in outcome. The goal of this study was to examine the extent to which agreement among anchors impacts MCID estimation and whether this relationship is moderated by cognitive severity status.

Analyses were completed on a longitudinal sample of 2,247 adults, age 50-103, from the Uniform Data Set 3.0. Outcome measures included the Clinical Dementia Rating - Sum of Boxes (CDR-SB), Functional Activities Questionnaire, and Montreal Cognitive Assessment.

For all of the outcomes, the MCID estimate was significantly higher when meaningful decline was endorsed by all of the raters compared to situations in which there was disagreement among the raters. For example, on the CDR-SB, agreement significantly impacted MCID estimates (F(1, 2241)=168.80, p<0.001; partial h2 = 0.07), such that the agreement group had greater CDR-SB change score (mean=1.29, SD1.98) than the no agreement group (mean=0.37, SD=1.38; Tukey HSD: p<0.001). In addition, the MCID estimate increased with increasing levels of cognitive impairment. For instance, on the CDR-SB, MCID estimates were significantly different across the severity groups (F(2, 2241)=138.27, p<0.001; partial h2 = 0.11), such that increase in CDR-SB was highest for the mild dementia group (mean=1.84, SD=2.42), moderate in the MCI group (mean=0.71, SD=1.30), and lowest for the cognitively normal group (mean=0.07, SD=0.55; Tukey HSD; all p’s < 0.001). Finally, cognitive severity status moderated the influence of agreement among raters on MCID estimation for the CDR-SB and FAQ, such that rater agreement demonstrated less influence on the MCID as disease severity increased. For example, on the CDR-SB, post-hoc tests revealed that there was a significant difference across agreement groups in the cognitively normal (p<0.001; Cohen’s d = 0.96) and MCI groups (p<0.001; Cohen’s d = 0.49), but agreement did not impact MCID estimates for the mild dementia group (p=0.065).

MCID estimates based on one anchor may underestimate meaningful change, and researchers should consider the viewpoints of multiple raters in constructing MCIDs. Consideration of agreement appears most important in the early stages of cognitive decline, which are the focus of most modern clinical trials.

Metabolic Syndrome (MetS) is a constellation of deleterious cardiometabolic health conditions (e.g., diabetes, hypertension) that have been linked to cognitive impairment and accelerated cognitive decline in older adults. Research has shown that Latinos are at increased risk for developing MetS relative to non-Latino Whites and the prevention, maintenance, and treatment of cardiometabolic risk factors are largely contingent upon health insurance status. Within the United States there are considerable state-based differences in eligibility and access to health insurance coverage. Although Texas has the second largest population of Latinos, they are one of the most underinsured groups within the state. There is some evidence to suggest that inconsistent healthcare is associated with cognitive impairment among underserved/underprivileged groups. The current study sought to examine whether insurance status moderates the association between MetS and cognitive functioning in an effort to inform public health policy initiatives vital to reducing age-related health disparities amongst Latino older adults residing in Texas.

The study sample included 850 primarily Spanish-speaking (67.6%) Latino older adults (mean age = 63.1±7.81) largely of Mexican origin/descent (95%) enrolled in the Health and Aging Brain Study-Health Disparities. All participants completed neuropsychological testing, a health exam, and questions about health insurance coverage. MetS status (MetS+ vs. MetS-) was determined by abnormal clinical abdominal obesity, triglycerides, high-density lipoprotein, blood pressure, and fasting glucose values. Health insurance status was determined by current enrollment in any private or public insurance plan. Cognition was assessed with Digit Span, Logical Memory I and II, Trail Making Test (A and B), Spanish-English Verbal Learning Test, and Letter Fluency (FAS). Raw scores were converted to z-scores which were subsequently averaged into two distinct memory and executive functioning composite scores. ANCOVAs controlling for age, sex, education, APOE e4 positivity, annual income, and primary language status were used examine health insurance status x MetS interactions on cognitive composites.

Approximately 54.6% of the sample met clinical criteria for MetS+ and 23.6% endorsed having no health insurance. There were no significant group differences in the proportion of MetS+ and MetS- individuals with and without health insurance (X 2 = .002, p =.96). Results revealed there was a significant MetS x health insurance status interaction on the memory composite (F = 5.39, p = .02). Post-hoc comparisons revealed that Latino older adults without health insurance demonstrated poorer memory performance relative to those with health insurance in the MetS+ group (p=.02). In contrast, there were no significant differences in memory performance across insurance status in the MetS- group (p=.35). Finally, there was no significant MetS x health insurance interaction on executive functioning (p=.60).

Findings revealed that health insurance coverage differentially impacts memory, but not executive functioning, amongst Latinos with MetS+. Underinsured Latinos with chronic cardiometabolic health conditions may be at risk for poor memory outcomes and increasing access to affordable healthcare could help mitigate the adverse effects of MetS+ on memory. Future studies examining the relationship between health insurance, MetS status, and neuroimaging markers may yield additional insight into mechanisms underlying age-related dementia disparities.

Cognitive screening tools such as the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) play an essential role in the clinical evaluation of neuropsychological functions. Despite the extensive investigations of the MoCA in English speaking countries as well as emerging adaptation work in a few Asian cultures, evidence base for the utility of the Vietnamese MoCA (MoCA-V) is lacking. This has posed a huge challenge for current and future clinical practice in Vietnam, as the country continues to assume a large burden of brain-related disorders. This study examined the construct validity of the MoCA-V and identified a cut-off score for the determination of cognitive impairment in a prevalent neurological condition in Vietnam - traumatic brain injury (TBI).

Participants included 129 neurologically healthy individuals and 80 patients with moderate-to-severe TBI. All participants completed the MoCA-V, along with other common neurocognitive measures such as the Trail Making Test (TMT) Parts A and B, Vietnamese Verbal Fluency Test, and Digit Span.

Pearson’s correlations revealed significant, moderate correlations between performance on the MoCA-V subdomains and more comprehensive cognitive measures. Performance on the MoCA-V Attention domain was correlated with both Digit Span Forward, r(110) = .453, p < .001] and Digit Span Backward, r(110) = .303, p = .001; performance on the MoCA Language domain was correlated with the Vietnamese Verbal Fluency Test, r(107) = .334, p < .001; and performance on the MoCA Executive Function domain was correlated with the TMT-B, r(108) = -.479, p = .022. Performance on the MoCA-V was also associated with age, r(127) = -.659, p < .001, and education, r(127) = .769, p < .001, consistent with the general effects of age and education in cognitive abilities. Finally, a cut-off score of 22.5 was identified for the detection of cognitive impairment in Vietnamese people with TBI (AUC = 0.811; 95% CI = .75-.87, p < .001).

This study provides the first evidence for the construct validity and clinical utility of the MoCA-V. Future research is necessary to cross-validate study findings among other clinical populations. Lessons learned from neuropsychological test translation and adaptation process will be discussed, particularly in the development of the administration materials and test instructions (e.g., considerations for individuals with limited formal education, influences of colonialism in the development of test stimuli).

Craft story recall test in the National Alzheimer’s Coordinating Center Uniformed Data Set 3 (NACC UDS3) neuropsychological battery has been employed to assess verbal memory and assist clinical diagnosis of mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and dementia. While a Chinese version of the test was adapted, no existing literature has examined the diagnostic validity of the test in Chinese Americans. This study aimed to evaluate the predictive validity of both immediate and delayed recall.

The Chinese version of Craft Story was administered in to 78 Chinese participants per their language preference of Mandarin or Cantonese. Outcome measures were verbatim and paraphrase recall of the story immediately and after a 20-minute delay. A multiple linear regression was performed to investigate the association of each outcome measure with age, education, gender, age when moved to the U.S., years in the U.S., and testing language. To assess its diagnostic value, cutoff standard deviation scores of -1.5 and -2.0 from the mean of the clinically cognitive normal participants were generated for MCI and dementia diagnoses, respectively. Due to the small sample size, a normative group fitting the mean age (73 years), years of education (12 years), and the majority gender (female) of the current sample were used to identify standard cut points. A receiver-operating characteristic analysis was used to compare predicted diagnosis with actual clinical diagnosis obtained through patients’ overall performance and a consensus meeting by licensed clinicians.

Younger age (p < 0.05) and being tested in Mandarin (p < .01) were positively associated with immediate and delayed recall. Strong positive correlations between each measure were observed (all p < .001), indicating a significant relationship between information encoded and retained. Among all the participants, 15 (19.2%) were diagnosed with MCI and 22 (28.2%) with dementia. For MCI diagnosis, the standard cutoff scores demonstrated adequate sensitivity (verbatim=82%, paraphrase=91%) but low specificity (verbatim=44%, paraphrase=67%) in all outcome measures. For dementia diagnosis, delayed recall showed strong sensitivity (100%) and adequate specificity (75%) in both verbatim and paraphrasing scores. Immediate recall paraphrase (sensitivity = 95%, specificity = 50%) showed a better sensitivity but lower specificity than verbatim scoring (sensitivity = 86%, specificity = 58%). The accuracy was higher in delayed recall for both MCI and dementia diagnosis. A preliminary analysis on the optimal cut points indicated higher cutoff scores to distinguish MCI and dementia from clinically cognitive normal population, and from each other (e.g., the optimal cut point for delayed verbatim in distinguishing MCI from normal is 8.0 (sensitivity=89%, specificity=73%, AUC=84.3%)).

Consistent with previous literature, Craft Story delayed recall served as a more accurate diagnostic tool for both MCI and dementia compared to immediate recall in older Chinese Americans. However, poor specificity might increase the chance of following false positive subjects in clinical trials. In addition, testing language appeared to impact performance on verbal memory recall of constructed information. Thus, future studies should focus on developing normative scores that address both the overall cultural differences of Chinese Americans and the heterogeneity within this population.

The Immigrant Health Paradox (IHP) suggests that immigrants have better health upon arrival in comparison to their U.S.-born Latinx counterparts, indicating that immigrants’ unique experiences may buffer against negative health outcomes, including cognition. Some studies indicate that IHP-related cognitive health benefits diminish with increased time spent in the U.S., while others suggest that this relationship may be age-dependent such that compared to migration during earlier or later life, migration during young/middle adulthood may be related to better cognition-potentially due to higher simultaneous cognitive demands associated with this age epoch (e.g., language acquisition, acculturation). However, this literature is equivocal and has methodological limitations (e.g., cognition typically assessed with cognitive screeners, lack of clinical populations) Thus, this study aimed to examine the role of age related to IHP and cognition within a well-characterized sample of HIV+ Latinx adults. It was hypothesized that compared to U.S.-born Latinx adults and those who immigrated earlier or later in life, the Latinx immigrant subgroup who migrated during young/middle adulthood would demonstrate better cognitive functioning.

This cross-sectional study included a HIV+ sample (A/=105) of 34 Latinx immigrants (Mage=45.56, SD=6.99) and 71 U.S.-born Latinx individuals (Mage=46.03, SD=7.63), who completed a comprehensive sociocultural questionnaire and cognitive battery. Demographically-adjusted average T-scores were computed for each cognitive test and domain (e.g., learning, memory). A series of Welch’s-corrected ANOVAS with post hoc Games-Howell tests for multiple comparisons were conducted to compare cognitive function across three groups: Latinx immigrants who migrated during earlier (<19 yrs) or later adulthood (>50 yrs), young/middle adulthood (20-49 yrs), and U.S.-born Latinx adults.

Compared to the other Latinx subgroups, Latinx immigrants who migrated during middle adulthood performed worse in Verbal Fluency (F(2,98)=8.04, p<.001), Attention/Working Memory (f(2,96)=6.10, p<.01), Executive Function (f(2,99)=5.11, p<.01), and Processing Speed (F(2,101)=3.36, p<.05). Posthoc Games-Howell tests showed that the mean Verbal Fluency (p<.01, 95% C.I.=[-21.37, -2.66]), Attention/Working Memory (p<.05, 95% C.I.=[-16.82, -1.59]), Executive Function (p<.01, 95% C.I.=[-14.66, -2.49]) and Processing Speed (p<.05, 95% C.I.=[-13.60, -1.31]) T-scores were significantly lower in Latinx immigrants who migrated in young/middle adulthood compared to the U.S.-born Latinx sample. Further, there were no differences between the U.S.-born Latinx group compared to the Latinx immigrant group who migrated earlier or later in life (ps>.05).

This preliminary study is the first to examine whether the potential protective cognitive effects of the IHP vary across the lifespan among Latinx immigrants with HIV, using a comprehensive neuropsychological battery. Age-related IHP benefits were not observed in this study. Moreover, Latinx immigrants who migrated during young/middle adulthood had worse cognitive functioning compared to their U.S.-born Latinx counterparts and those that migrated earlier or later in life. A possible explanation for this study’s unexpected findings is that the IHP is outdated due to the current sociopolitical climate immigrants experience compared to the 1980s when the theory was developed. Future studies, with larger samples, longitudinal designs, and greater sociocultural characterization (e.g., immigration reason/s, country of origin, discrimination), are needed to better understand the role of IHP in cognition.

The AD8 is a validated screening instrument for functional changes that may be caused by cognitive decline and dementia. It is frequently used in clinics and research studies because it is short and easy to administer, with a cut off score of 2 out of 8 items recommended to maximize sensitivity and specificity. This cutoff assumes that all 8 items provide equivalent “information” about everyday functioning. In this study, we used item response theory (IRT) to test this assumption. To determine the relevance of this measure of everyday functioning in men and women, and across race, ethnicity, and education, we conducted differential item functioning (DIF) analysis to test for item bias.

Data came from the 2021 follow up of the High School & Beyond cohort (N=8,690; mean age 57.5 ± 1.2; 55% women), a nationally representative, longitudinal study of Americans who were first surveyed in 1980 when they were in the 10th or 12th grade. Participants were asked AD8 questions about their own functioning via phone or internet survey. First, we estimated a one-parameter (i.e., differing difficulty, equal discrimination across items) and two-parameter IRT model (i.e., differing difficulty and differing discrimination across items). We compared model fit using a likelihood-ratio test. Second, we tested for uniform and non-uniform DIF on AD8 items by sex, race and ethnicity (non-Hispanic White, non-Hispanic Black, Hispanic), education level (high school or less, some college, BA degree or more), and survey mode (phone or internet). We examined DIF salience by comparing the difference between original and DIF-adjusted AD8 scores to the standard error of measurement of the original score.

The two-parameter IRT model fit the data significantly better than the one-parameter model, indicating that some items were more strongly related to underlying everyday functional ability than others. For example, the “problems with judgment” item had higher discrimination (more information) than the “less interest in hobbies/activities” item. There were significant differences in item endorsement by race/ethnicity, education, and survey mode. We found significant uniform and non-uniform DIF on several items across each of these groups. For example, for a given level of functional decline (theta) White participants were more likely to endorse “Daily problems with thinking/memory” than Black and Hispanic participants. The DIF was salient (i.e., caused AD8 scores to change by greater than the standard error of measurement for a large portion of respondents) for those with a college degree and phone respondents.

In a population representative sample of Americans ∼age 57, the items on the AD8 contributed differing levels of discrimination along the range of everyday functioning that is impacted by later life cognitive impairment. This suggests that a simple cut-off or summed score may not be appropriate since some items yield more information about the underlying construct than others. Furthermore, we observed significant and salient DIF on several items by education and survey mode, AD8 scores should not be compared across education groups and assessment modes without adjustment for this measurement bias.

Appropriate adjustments to normative data for neuropsychological (NP) tests are imperative for their equitable use in brain health practices. Age and education are known to be strong predictors of test performance. In settings where validated tests are not available, common practice has been to adapt and apply them in similar fashion as settings where they were developed. However, demographic adjustments cannot be assumed de facto to be universal in their strength and domain associations. For example, South Africa (SA) and Zimbabwe are neighboring countries with some similarities in their demographic makeup, but with vastly different sociopolitical trajectories- Zimbabwe was colonially occupied until 1980 and SA was oppressed under Apartheid until 1994- which have impacted access to and quality of education by severely limiting educational opportunities for native citizens. The present study explored whether the direction and strength of relationships between age and education on NP test performance were similar or not between SA and Zimbabwe adults living with and without HIV.

Data was extracted from two IRB-approved studies in SA and Zimbabwe with similar inclusion and exclusion criteria. The SA sample (n=214) was comprised of 56% females, 48% HIV-positive adults, mean age of 34 years, and a nine-year range in education (3-14 years). The Zimbabwe sample (n=212) was comprised of 68% females, 67% HIV-positive adults, mean age of 36 years, and a thirteen-year range in education (7-20 years). Participants completed NeuroScreen, a tablet-based battery of 12 brief NP tests adapted for indigenous SA and Zimbabwe languages. The two study samples were analyzed separately. Zero order correlations between each of the tests and age and gender were conducted to determine the influence of the demographic variables. Relationships with moderate correlations (r>0.3) in both samples were further analyzed using univariate ANOVA to examine the main effects and interactions of age and education

Overall, there was a similar pattern of results across samples, with nine tests showing no-to-low associative relationships with age and education respectively. Moderate, significant relationships were found between age, education and three tests of processing speed (Visual Discrimination A, Visual discrimination B, and Number Speed) in both samples. Age and education had different effects on Visual discrimination A across samples with a significant main effect for age but not education in SA [F(40,83)=3.060, p<0.01], whilst Zimbabwe had a significant main effect for education but not age [F(10,87)=4.541, p<0.01]. Visual Discrimination B and Number Speed showed significant main effects for both variables in both samples. However, there was a significant interaction for both tests in Zimbabwe only.

The current study is novel in its exploration of country-specific relationships between NP test performance and demographic factors in settings where assessment science is emergent. Results demonstrate the presence of differential relationships between demographic variables on test performance which raises questions about the source of these differences. One important potential source is the socio-cultural context of each country and the intersection of demographic factors in these contexts. Further research is required to explore these considerations.

Accurate early detection of subtle cognitive difficulties is critical for optimizing treatment of neurodegenerative disease. Those who speak English as a second language (ESL) in the US may be at a disadvantage on Englishwritten neuropsychological tests, increasing the potential for error, particularly when cognitive difficulties are mild and/or when informants are not available/unreliable. This study examined the utility of a standardized, performance-based test of everyday function for the assessment of cognition in ESL older adults.

Five ESL participants (Mage=83 years; range 65-84 years old) were recruited along with 43 cognitively healthy, native English speakers (controls) as part of a larger study of functional assessment in community-dwelling older adults. Participants were required to identify a study partner to answer questions about their cognitive abilities and everyday functioning. ESL participants reported diverse native languages: Cantonese, Mandarin, Gujarati/Hindi, Farsi, and Azeri. One of the 5 ESL participants reported a diagnosis of MCI. Participants completed the Mini-Mental Status Exam, Trail Making Tests, Digit Span, Boston Naming Test, Hopkins Verbal Learning Test, and Brief Visual Memory Test, resulting in 15 test scores. Participants also completed the Naturalistic Action Test (NAT), a performance-based tests that requires preparation of a breakfast and lunch using standardized objects presented on a table. Recordings of NAT performance were scored by two coders for time to completion, accomplishment of task steps, and errors (overt, micro-error, motor), resulting in 10 scores for the Breakfast and the Lunch tasks. Any discrepancies amongst the two coders were resolved by our lab. Informant-report questionnaires included the Functional Assessment Questionnaire (FAQ), Everyday Cognition Questionnaire (ECog) and IADL-C. Total scores from the cognitive tests, NAT, and informant reports for each ESL participant were compared against the scores of Controls by computing T-scores using the Control M and SD. Low/impaired test scores were defined as <1.5 SD.

Informants reported intact everyday function (FAQ, IADL-C) for all ESL participants. Informant-reported ECog scores varied as expected; with mild decline reported for the participant with MCI. On traditional cognitive tests, ESL participants showed variable performance, such that low scores were obtained on up to 9 of the 15 scores. The ESL participant with MCI obtained low scores on 11/15 scores. On the NAT, all of the ESL participants without MCI showed scores on the Breakfast (accomplishment, errors) that were comparable to Controls. Completion time for both Breakfast and Lunch and Lunch scores (accomplishment, errors) were variable, with low across observed in ESL participants with healthy cognition.

Older participants with ESL and healthy cognition showed highly variable scores on traditional, neuropsychological tests. However, on one item from a performance-based assessment of everyday function (NAT Breakfast), ESL participants with healthy cognition consistently performed well compared to healthy Controls. Performance was less consistent for completion time across both NAT tasks and on all measures from the Lunch task, for which the steps and objects may have been less familiar to ESL participants. Thus, performance-based testing holds promise for informing neuropsychological assessment of ESL older adults, but care should be taken in selecting test items that are highly familiar and outcome measures that are most meaningful across a range of cultures.

Technological advances allow for increased international collaboration within the medical community (e.g., internet, e-mail, instant messaging, video-teleconferencing [VTC]). Partnering with clinicians and researchers across the globe allows for shared resources, particularly beneficial for underserved populations and communities with poor access to specialty resources, including neuropsychology. Along with the potential benefits of such collaborations comes challenges including language, cultural, and physical barriers. The presented findings detail important lessons learned from an ongoing research collaboration between the Einstein team (Bronx, NY) and a research group in Kerala, India, called the Kerala Einstein Study (KES), a study evaluating pre-dementia syndromes in Indian older adults. Here we highlight the training process of research assistants administering neuropsychological measures to older adults in India, by neuropsychologists in the USA.

One study manager and several research assistants (collectively referred to as RAs) based in India were trained by the first author, a neuropsychology postdoctoral fellow (MS) based in the US via VTC (i.e., Zoom), under supervision of a clinical neuropsychologist. RAs were trained in test administration and scoring for a variety of neuropsychological measures. RAs speak Malayalam and English; training occurred in English. Following training, VTC meetings were held to process testing experience and channels were created for ongoing administration/scoring questions and concerns (i.e., email, WhatsApp). RAs scanned and uploaded scored protocols to a protected web-based platform. MS double-scored several protocols and additional VTC meetings were held to discuss/update scoring procedures.

Physical challenges included time difference between sites, internet connectivity, language barriers (i.e., varying English dialects) cultural considerations (e.g., some test/task directions were changed based on RAs knowledge of more appropriate wording). Test administration challenges included cultural factors (i.e., allowing for continuation of some tasks beyond time limits for rapport) and RA comfort level with administration of some tasks (e.g., trail making test). Scoring challenges included RAs tendency to score too strictly or leniently and confusion regarding specific scoring criteria. At an initial VTC meeting, MS modeled test administration. Then RAs practiced the tests together. To reduce challenges including time difference, connectivity problems, language barriers, and comfort with testing/scoring, VTC training sessions were scheduled individually between MS and each RA. During these sessions, the RA 'tested’ MS and received immediate feedback. Most sessions lasted approximately 90 minutes with one RA requiring a second session (i.e., sessions were tailored for individuals to obtain level of testing comfortability and competency). After each RA was 'cleared’ by MS to start testing, RAs began testing and scoring. Following MS’s review of several scored protocols, meetings took place in groups in order to improve scoring skills and increase consistency between RAs. Given the continued high degree in scoring variability, a third RA was hired with one of his main responsibilities being to double score all protocols.

Findings highlight important challenges and considerations for remotely training study personnel to administer neuropsychological measures (i.e., RAs in India and neuropsychologists in the USA). Important steps to reduce identified barriers included individualized training sessions, specific training in scoring, and open/ongoing communication channels.

Evaluate measures used to operationalize apathy in relation to cognitive impairment among Hispanic/Latin Americans and synthesize associations of apathy with cognitive impairment.

A systematic review of the available literature following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines was conducted. This review covered studies on the relationship between apathy and cognitive impairment among Hispanic/Latin Americans across normal aging and neurocognitive disorders. The first stage of the review consisted of collecting all publications that contained (1) English or Spanish-speaking participants, (2) with measures for reported apathy, (3) assessment of cognitive functioning or diagnosis of neurocognitive disorder, (4) with Hispanic/Latin Americans represented in the sample. There was no limit regarding publication date. The required minimum of H/L participants in selected studies was determined based on a standard of representation in the United States general population, which is around 18.5%. In the second stage of the review, studies were screened excluding all studies that did not meet the criteria.

Thirteen, 37, and 17 studies were identified by APA PsychInfo, EMBASE, and PubMed, respectively. After removing 19 duplicate records, 48 reports were then assessed for eligibility. Thirty-five of those reports were missing apathy and cognition associations, were under-reported in information such as conference abstracts, or were missing adequate representation of H/L participants. This resulted in a total of 13 papers included in this review. Of the eleven cross-sectional studies, nine demonstrated significant differences or associations between apathy and cognitive status, one demonstrated a descriptive difference between apathy and cognitive status (i.e., no hypothesis test conducted), while one demonstrated null effects. All effects suggested that as apathy increased, cognitive impairment increased. These cross-sectional studies spanned across Säo Paulo, Brazil, Los Angeles, California, West Texas, Cuba, the Dominican Republic, Peru, Venezuela, Mexico, Puerto Rico, and Southwestern United States. This included community and clinic samples of participants. Of the two longitudinal studies, they both demonstrated non-significant associations of apathy and cognitive status. One study in Mexico suggested a risk ratio over 1 where apathy was non-significantly associated with dementia risk, while the other study in Texas, United States had hazard ratios below 1 where apathy was non-significantly associated with mild cognitive impairment risk.

The Neuropsychiatric Inventory (NPI) apathy subscale was the most used measure for apathy in this review (81.8% of included studies). However, a recent systematic review on apathy measurement in older adults and people with dementia specifically stated that the apathy dimension commonly used in the NPI should not be employed outside of screening for apathy. This suggests potential bias and poor evidence in the current literature consisting of apathy research with H/Ls. Longitudinal studies evaluating the utility of examining apathy in relation to cognitive impairment with diverse ethnoracial groups, in addition to Hispanic/Latin Americans, are warranted. Assessing construct equivalence of apathy across demographic characteristics such as language, education, and informant characteristics should be conducted to elucidate potential biases in measurement.