Home › Research › Cognitive tests and assessment
Associations of visual paired associative learning task with global cognition and its potential usefulness as a screening tool for Alzheimer's Dementia
Hicks EB, Ahsan N, Bhandari A, Ghazala Z, Wang W, Pollock BG, Rajji TK, Kumar S.. International psychogeriatrics, 2020-12-18
Topic: Amyloid, tau and blood-test diagnosis
Objective Appropriate screening is integral to the early diagnosis and management of Alzheimer's Dementia (AD). The Paired Associates Learning (PAL) task is a digital cognitive task that is free of cultural, language, and educational biases. This study examined the association between the PAL task performance and global cognition and the usefulness of the PAL task as a screening tool for AD. Design Cross-sectional. Setting Academic hospital. Methods Twenty-five participants with AD and 22 healthy comparators (HC) were included. The Cambridge Neuropsychological Test Automated Battery PAL task and the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) were used to assess cognition. We assessed the relationship between the PAL task and MoCA performance using Pearson correlation and linear regression. We also examined the PAL task's ability to distinguish between AD and HC participants using Receiver Operating Characteristic curve (ROC) analysis. Measurements MoCA Total Score had a strong positive correlation with PAL Stages Completed score (r = 0.8, p < 0.001), and a strong negative correlation with PAL Total Errors (adjusted) score (r = -0.9, p < 0.001). Further, PAL Total Errors (adjusted) score predicted the MoCA Total Score (F (4, 46) = 37.2, p < 0.001). On ROC analysis, PAL Total Errors (adjusted) score cut-off of 54 errors had 92% sensitivity and 86% specificity to detect AD. Conclusions Performance on the PAL task is highly associated with global cognition. Further, the PAL task can differentiate patients with AD from HCs with high sensitivity and specificity. Thus, the PAL task may hold potential usage as an easy-to-administer screening tool for AD.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Hicks, E. B., Ahsan, N., Bhandari, A., Ghazala, Z., Wang, W., Pollock, B. G., et al. (2021). Associations of visual paired associative learning task with global cognition and its potential usefulness as a screening tool for Alzheimer's Dementia. International psychogeriatrics. https://doi.org/10.1017/s1041610220003841
Vancouver
Hicks EB, Ahsan N, Bhandari A, Ghazala Z, Wang W, Pollock BG, et al. Associations of visual paired associative learning task with global cognition and its potential usefulness as a screening tool for Alzheimer's Dementia. International psychogeriatrics. 2021. doi:10.1017/s1041610220003841. PMID: 33336635.
BibTeX
@article{hicks2021-33336635,
author = {Hicks, E. B. and Ahsan, N. and Bhandari, A. and Ghazala, Z. and Wang, W. and Pollock, B. G. and Rajji, T. K. and Kumar, S.},
title = {{Associations of visual paired associative learning task with global cognition and its potential usefulness as a screening tool for Alzheimer's Dementia}},
journal = {International psychogeriatrics},
year = {2021},
doi = {10.1017/s1041610220003841},
pmid = {33336635},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1017/s1041610220003841}
}
Built from the record alzhub holds for this paper, not looked up. Volume, issue and page numbers are not held in the record. The record names 8 authors; APA and Vancouver show the first six, BibTeX and the downloads carry all of them. Check the citation against the original before you use it.
Key findings
- Conclusions Performance on the PAL task is highly associated with global cognition.
Study details
- Study designcross-sectional
- Evidence strengthLow
How this study scored 47/100
Published in a peer-reviewed journal, and it is a snapshot of people at one point in time. Scored zero for sample size, effect reported, studied in people and randomised / blinded because the record does not state it. We have no data on journal's citation record, times cited, citations per year, impact for its field and year, cited by studies here, still being cited, senior author's track record, institution's track record and multi-centre collaboration, so those were left out: it earned 27 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 47 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 7 / 10 | Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (International psychogeriatrics) |
| Journal's citation record | — / 4 | No journal record from OpenAlex — left out of this score |
| Study design | 4 / 12 | A snapshot of people at one point in time |
| Strength of evidence | 1 / 5 | Rated “low” in our summary |
| Peer-review validation | 10 / 10 | Peer-reviewed. Published as an article in a named peer-reviewed journal. |
| How recent | 3 / 5 | 2021 — within 6 year(s) of the newest study here |
| Sample size | 0 / 4 | Participant count not stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Effect reported | 0 / 3 | No effect size reported — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Studied in people | 0 / 3 | Not stated whether this was studied in people — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Randomised / blinded | 0 / 2 | No randomisation or blinding stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Times cited | — / 7 | No citation count (not found in OpenAlex) — left out of this score |
| Citations per year | — / 5 | No citation count or no year — left out of this score |
| Impact for its field and year | — / 6 | No field-weighted citation impact (OpenAlex has none yet) — left out of this score |
| Cited by studies here | — / 6 | Not yet checked against this library's citation graph — left out of this score |
| Still being cited | — / 4 | No yearly citation counts — left out of this score |
| Senior author's track record | — / 4 | Senior author's record not available — left out of this score |
| Institution's track record | — / 3 | No institution listed in OpenAlex — left out of this score |
| Multi-centre collaboration | — / 3 | Institutions not listed — left out of this score |
| Indexed in PubMed | 2 / 2 | Indexed in PubMed (PMID 33336635) |
| Free to read | 0 / 2 | Behind a paywall — scores zero |
| Points | 27 / 58 | Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 27 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 47 out of 100. |
| Total | 47 / 100 | — |
What each of these 20 components measures, and what this score is not →
Read the original
Free copy unknown: no free-copy check has an answer for this record yet. That does not mean it is paywalled.
Related studies in Cognitive tests and assessment
Also tagged “screening-tool”
3 studies in the library carry the topic tag “screening-tool”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 3 tagged studies.