Home › Research › Down syndrome and Alzheimer's
Modified Cued Recall Test: Longitudinal Analysis of Test Versions and Item Recall in Adults With Down Syndrome
Schworer EK, Handen BL, Krinsky-McHale S, Hom CL, Clare ICH, Harp JP, Pulsifer MB, Mapstone M et al.. Journal of intellectual disability research : JIDR, 2025-04-20
Topic: Risk, prevention and care in population studies
Demonstrated utility of the mCRT warrants further investigation into comparisons between the A and B versions, free versus cued recall and changes in performance over time to better understand sensitivity for tracking memory decline over time based on age and AD clinical status. Results Version differences were identified, with the most salient differences in the moderate and severe/profound ID groups. Free and cued recall scores were lower in those with MCI and AD dementia, with the exception of the mild ID MCI group, whose cued recall scores were not significantly different from the CS group. Conclusion Characterising test version differences and participant free versus cued recall performance on the mCRT is important for understanding performance under testing conditions and to maximise the sensitivity of clinical interventions to capture meaningful effects. Our findings suggest that clinical AD trials for DS should be cautious about using both versions of the mCRT.
Key findings
- Demonstrated utility of the mCRT warrants further investigation into comparisons between the A and B versions, free versus cued recall and changes in performance over time to better understand sensitivity for tracking memory decline over time based on age and AD clinical status.
- Results Version differences were identified, with the most salient differences in the moderate and severe/profound ID groups.
- Free and cued recall scores were lower in those with MCI and AD dementia, with the exception of the mild ID MCI group, whose cued recall scores were not significantly different from the CS group.
- Conclusion Characterising test version differences and participant free versus cued recall performance on the mCRT is important for understanding performance under testing conditions and to maximise the sensitivity of clinical interventions to capture meaningful effects.
- Our findings suggest that clinical AD trials for DS should be cautious about using both versions of the mCRT.
Why it matters
This longitudinal study of a cued recall test found version differences and lower free and cued recall scores in people with mild cognitive impairment and Alzheimer's dementia, with one exception in the mild intellectual disability group. It concerns a memory test only and reports no treatment, cure, or prevention.
Study details
- Study designlongitudinal study
- Participants272
- Evidence strengthModerate
How this study scored 47/100
Published in a peer-reviewed journal, and it is a longitudinal study following the same people over time. Scored zero for effect reported and randomised / blinded because the record does not state it.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 7 / 10 | Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Journal of intellectual disability research : JIDR) |
| Journal's citation record | 2 / 4 | Journal of Intellectual Disability Research: journal h-index 161 (OpenAlex, 2026-10-29) |
| Study design | 7 / 12 | A longitudinal study following the same people over time |
| Strength of evidence | 3 / 5 | Rated “moderate” 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 | 272 participants |
| Effect reported | 0 / 3 | No effect size reported — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| 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 | 0 / 7 | Cited 0 times (OpenAlex, 2026-10-10) |
| Citations per year | 0 / 5 | 0.0 citations a year over 3 year(s) since 2025 |
| Impact for its field and year | 0 / 6 | Cited 0.0× 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 0 times in 2024–2026 (2026 still in progress; OpenAlex) |
| Senior author's track record | 2 / 4 | Last-listed author Sigan L. Hartley: h-index 43 (OpenAlex, whole career) |
| Institution's track record | 3 / 3 | Harvard University: institution h-index 3,235 (OpenAlex) |
| Multi-centre collaboration | 2 / 3 | OpenAlex lists 7 institution(s) in 2 countries |
| Indexed in PubMed | 2 / 2 | Indexed in PubMed (PMID 40254895) |
| Free to read | 0 / 2 | Behind a paywall — scores zero |
| Total | 47 / 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).
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
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.
APA 7th
Schworer, E. K., Handen, B. L., Krinsky-McHale, S., Hom, C. L., Clare, I. C. H., Harp, J. P., et al. (2025). Modified Cued Recall Test: Longitudinal Analysis of Test Versions and Item Recall in Adults With Down Syndrome. Journal of intellectual disability research : JIDR. https://doi.org/10.1111/jir.13237
Vancouver
Schworer EK, Handen BL, Krinsky-McHale S, Hom CL, Clare ICH, Harp JP, et al. Modified Cued Recall Test: Longitudinal Analysis of Test Versions and Item Recall in Adults With Down Syndrome. Journal of intellectual disability research : JIDR. 2025. doi:10.1111/jir.13237. PMID: 40254895.
BibTeX
@article{schworer2025-40254895,
author = {Schworer, E. K. and Handen, B. L. and Krinsky-McHale, S. and Hom, C. L. and Clare, I. C. H. and Harp, J. P. and Pulsifer, M. B. and Mapstone, M. and others},
title = {{Modified Cued Recall Test: Longitudinal Analysis of Test Versions and Item Recall in Adults With Down Syndrome}},
journal = {Journal of intellectual disability research : JIDR},
year = {2025},
doi = {10.1111/jir.13237},
pmid = {40254895},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1111/jir.13237}
}
Studies this one cites
Referenced by this study and also in the alzhub library, so you can read them here.
Related studies in Down syndrome and Alzheimer's
Also tagged “down”
527 studies in the library carry the topic tag “down”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 527 tagged studies.