Home › Research › Disparities
Normative data for 8 neuropsychological tests in older blacks and whites from the atherosclerosis risk in communities (ARIC) study
Schneider AL, Sharrett AR, Gottesman RF, Coresh J, Coker L, Wruck L, Selnes OA, Deal J et al.. Alzheimer disease and associated disorders, 2015-01-01
Topic: Amyloid, tau and blood-test diagnosis
Accurate assessment of cognitive impairment requires comparison of cognitive performance in individuals to performance in a comparable healthy normative population. Few prior studies have included a large number of black participants and few have excluded participants from the normative sample with subclinical/latent neurological disease or dementia. This study provides age, race, and education-specific normative data for 8 cognitive tests derived from 320 black and 392 white participants aged 61 to 82 years (mean 71 y) in the Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities (ARIC) study without clinical or subclinical/latent neurological disease. Normative data are provided for the Delayed Word Recall Test, Logical Memory Parts I and II, the Word Fluency Test, Animal Naming, the Trail Making Test Parts A and B and the Digit Symbol Substitution Test. Age, race, and education-specific mean and -1.5 SD scores are given in tabular form and graphically, as well as regression-based equations to derive adjusted score cut-points. These robust normative data should enhance comparison across studies of cognitive aging, where these measures are widely used, and improve interpretation of performance on these tests for the diagnosis of cognitive impairment not only within the ARIC cohort, but also among older blacks and whites with similar demographics.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Schneider, A. L., Sharrett, A. R., Gottesman, R. F., Coresh, J., Coker, L., Wruck, L., et al. (2015). Normative data for 8 neuropsychological tests in older blacks and whites from the atherosclerosis risk in communities (ARIC) study. Alzheimer disease and associated disorders. https://doi.org/10.1097/wad.0000000000000042
Vancouver
Schneider AL, Sharrett AR, Gottesman RF, Coresh J, Coker L, Wruck L, et al. Normative data for 8 neuropsychological tests in older blacks and whites from the atherosclerosis risk in communities (ARIC) study. Alzheimer disease and associated disorders. 2015. doi:10.1097/wad.0000000000000042. PMID: 24759546.
BibTeX
@article{schneider2015-24759546,
author = {Schneider, A. L. and Sharrett, A. R. and Gottesman, R. F. and Coresh, J. and Coker, L. and Wruck, L. and Selnes, O. A. and Deal, J. and others},
title = {{Normative data for 8 neuropsychological tests in older blacks and whites from the atherosclerosis risk in communities (ARIC) study}},
journal = {Alzheimer disease and associated disorders},
year = {2015},
doi = {10.1097/wad.0000000000000042},
pmid = {24759546},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1097/wad.0000000000000042}
}
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
- Few prior studies have included a large number of black participants and few have excluded participants from the normative sample with subclinical/latent neurological disease or dementia.
- This study provides age, race, and education-specific normative data for 8 cognitive tests derived from 320 black and 392 white participants aged 61 to 82 years (mean 71 y) in the Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities (ARIC) study without clinical or subclinical/latent neurological disease.
- Normative data are provided for the Delayed Word Recall Test, Logical Memory Parts I and II, the Word Fluency Test, Animal Naming, the Trail Making Test Parts A and B and the Digit Symbol Substitution Test.
- Age, race, and education-specific mean and -1.5 SD scores are given in tabular form and graphically, as well as regression-based equations to derive adjusted score cut-points.
- These robust normative data should enhance comparison across studies of cognitive aging, where these measures are widely used, and improve interpretation of performance on these tests for the diagnosis of cognitive impairment not only within the ARIC cohort, but also among older blacks and whites with similar demographics.
Why it matters
Doctors judge whether someone's memory or thinking test score is "low" by comparing it with healthy people like them, but few reference groups have included many Black older adults or screened out people with hidden brain disease. This study gives age-, race- and education-specific average scores and −1.5 SD cut-points for 8 common tests, based on 320 Black and 392 white ARIC participants aged 61–82 with no clinical or subclinical neurological disease. It is a tool for interpreting test results in people with similar backgrounds; it does not diagnose, treat or prevent Alzheimer's disease.
New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Disparities →
Study details
- Evidence strengthModerate
How this study scored 43/100
Published in a peer-reviewed journal. Scored zero for study design, sample size, effect reported, studied in people and randomised / blinded because the record does not state it.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 7 / 10 | Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Alzheimer disease and associated disorders) |
| Journal's citation record | 1 / 4 | Alzheimer Disease & Associated Disorders: journal h-index 131 (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 | 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 | 1 / 5 | 2015 — within 20 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 | 4 / 7 | Cited 68 times (OpenAlex, 2026-10-10) |
| Citations per year | 2 / 5 | 5.2 citations a year over 13 year(s) since 2015 |
| Impact for its field and year | 3 / 6 | Cited 4.5× the average for papers of its field and year (OpenAlex FWCI) |
| Cited by studies here | 2 / 6 | Cited by 9 other studies in this library |
| Still being cited | 1 / 4 | Cited 13 times in 2024–2026 (2026 still in progress; OpenAlex) |
| Senior author's track record | 3 / 4 | Last-listed author Thomas H. Mosley: h-index 94 (OpenAlex, whole career) |
| Institution's track record | 2 / 3 | Johns Hopkins University: institution h-index 2,306 (OpenAlex) |
| Multi-centre collaboration | 2 / 3 | OpenAlex lists 7 institution(s) in 1 country |
| Indexed in PubMed | 2 / 2 | Indexed in PubMed (PMID 24759546) |
| Free to read | 0 / 2 | Behind a paywall — scores zero |
| Total | 43 / 100 | — |
What each of these 20 components measures, and what this score is not →
Read the original
- DOI: 10.1097/wad.0000000000000042
- PubMed: 24759546
- Original source →
- Free full text: PubMed Central →
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.
Later studies that cite this one
9 studies in the alzhub library list this one in their references. Showing the 8 highest-scoring.
Related studies in Disparities
Also tagged “vessel”
900 studies in the library carry the topic tag “vessel”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 900 tagged studies.