Home › Research › Getting a diagnosis
Can Frontal Assessment Battery Discriminate between Patients with Alzheimer’s and Frontotemporal Dementia?
Fabrissio Grandi, Loreto Olavarría, Mario A. Parra, David Martínez‐Pernía, Cesar Serey, José Lema, Carolina Delgado, Teresita de Jesús Montiel Ramos et al.. Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology, 2025-07-26
Topic: Risk, prevention and care in population studies
FAB-Ch scores were significantly lower in individuals with dementia compared to controls (p < .001). However, there were no significant differences between ADD and bvFTD groups (p = .59). The FAB-Ch showed strong discriminatory power between dementia and controls (AUC = 0.882; sensitivity = 0.731; specificity = 0.885), but poor discrimination between ADD and bvFTD (AUC = 0.465; p = .59). Cluster analysis among patients with dementia revealed three distinct executive profiles corresponding to different levels of cognitive impairment (p < .001). The FAB-Ch effectively differentiates individuals with dementia from cognitively unimpaired controls but does not distinguish between ADD and bvFTD. Nevertheless, it is sensitive to executive dysfunction and can aid in the clinical characterization of dementia severity and heterogeneity.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Grandi, F., Olavarría, L., Parra, M. A., Martínez‐Pernía, D., Serey, C., Lema, J., et al. (2025). Can Frontal Assessment Battery Discriminate between Patients with Alzheimer’s and Frontotemporal Dementia? Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology. https://doi.org/10.1093/arclin/acaf073
Vancouver
Grandi F, Olavarría L, Parra MA, Martínez‐Pernía D, Serey C, Lema J, et al. Can Frontal Assessment Battery Discriminate between Patients with Alzheimer’s and Frontotemporal Dementia? Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology. 2025. doi:10.1093/arclin/acaf073. PMID: 40878813.
BibTeX
@article{grandi2025-40878813,
author = {Grandi, Fabrissio and Olavarría, Loreto and Parra, Mario A. and Martínez‐Pernía, David and Serey, Cesar and Lema, José and Delgado, Carolina and Ramos, Teresita de Jesús Montiel and others},
title = {{Can Frontal Assessment Battery Discriminate between Patients with Alzheimer’s and Frontotemporal Dementia?}},
journal = {Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology},
year = {2025},
doi = {10.1093/arclin/acaf073},
pmid = {40878813},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1093/arclin/acaf073}
}
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's author list ends in “et al.”, so not every author is named. Check the citation against the original before you use it.
Key findings
- FAB-Ch scores were significantly lower in individuals with dementia compared to controls (p < .001).
- However, there were no significant differences between ADD and bvFTD groups (p = .59).
- The FAB-Ch showed strong discriminatory power between dementia and controls (AUC = 0.882; sensitivity = 0.731; specificity = 0.885), but poor discrimination between ADD and bvFTD (AUC = 0.465; p = .59).
- Cluster analysis among patients with dementia revealed three distinct executive profiles corresponding to different levels of cognitive impairment (p < .001).
- The FAB-Ch effectively differentiates individuals with dementia from cognitively unimpaired controls but does not distinguish between ADD and bvFTD.
Why it matters
The Frontal Assessment Battery could tell people with dementia from healthy controls but could not tell Alzheimer's disease from frontotemporal dementia. This tool may help characterize dementia severity but does not treat, cure, or prevent Alzheimer's disease.
New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Getting a diagnosis →
Study details
- Participants288
- Effect sizeAUC = 0.882; AUC = 0.465
- Evidence strengthLow
How this study scored 46/100
Published in a peer-reviewed journal. Scored zero for study design and randomised / blinded because the record does not state it.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 7 / 10 | Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology) |
| Journal's citation record | 2 / 4 | Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology: journal h-index 151 (OpenAlex, 2026-10-29) |
| Study design | 0 / 12 | No study design recorded — scores zero, not guessed (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| 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 | 4 / 5 | 2025 — within 3 year(s) of the newest study here |
| Sample size | 2 / 4 | 288 participants |
| Effect reported | 3 / 3 | Effect reported with a statistic (interval, p-value, ratio or similar) |
| Studied in people | 3 / 3 | Studied in people (participant count stated) |
| Randomised / blinded | 0 / 2 | No randomisation or blinding stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Times cited | 1 / 7 | Cited 2 times (OpenAlex, 2026-10-10) |
| Citations per year | 0 / 5 | 0.7 citations a year over 3 year(s) since 2025 |
| Impact for its field and year | 2 / 6 | Cited 1.3× the average for papers of its field and year (OpenAlex FWCI) |
| Cited by studies here | 0 / 6 | No other study in this library cites it |
| Still being cited | 0 / 4 | Cited 2 times in 2024–2026 (2026 still in progress; OpenAlex) |
| Senior author's track record | 2 / 4 | Last-listed author Andrea Slachevsky: h-index 42 (OpenAlex, whole career) |
| Institution's track record | 2 / 3 | University of California, San Francisco: institution h-index 1,915 (OpenAlex) |
| Multi-centre collaboration | 3 / 3 | OpenAlex lists 15 institution(s) in 4 countries |
| Indexed in PubMed | 2 / 2 | Indexed in PubMed (PMID 40878813) |
| Free to read | 2 / 2 | Free to read |
| Total | 46 / 100 | — |
What each of these 20 components measures, and what this score is not →
Read the original
Full text: free to read — OpenAlex lists this copy as free to read: the link above (checked 6 Feb 1020).
Studies this one cites
Referenced by this study and also in the alzhub library, so you can read them here.
Related studies in Getting a diagnosis
Also tagged “prevalence”
1,224 studies in the library carry the topic tag “prevalence”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 1,224 tagged studies.