Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The Assessment of Change: Serial Assessments in Dementia Evaluations

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Handbook on the Neuropsychology of Aging and Dementia

Part of the book series: Clinical Handbooks in Neuropsychology ((CHNEURO))

Abstract

The focus of the clinical neuropsychologist in everyday practice is on neurocognitive change. Because the diagnosis of dementia as well as mild cognitive impairment requires evidence of cognitive decline over time, the assessment of meaningful neurocognitive change is especially relevant in the evaluation of older adults. We briefly discuss the clinical use of norm-referenced tests used in traditional single-point assessments and then focus on the use of serial assessments to objectively monitor and assess cognitive changes over time, discussing the unique advantages and challenges of serial assessments. An overview and distillation of reliable change methods are presented and applied to a case example, demonstrating how these methods can be used as effective tools to inform the clinical evaluation of the individual patient. In the end, we hope to leave the reader with an appreciation that change is a unique variable with its own inherent statistical properties and clinical meaning.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 269.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 349.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 499.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Barth JT, Pliskin N, Axelrod B, et al. Introduction to the NAN 2001 definition of a clinical neuropsychologist. NAN Policy and Planning Committee. Arch Clin Neuropsychol. 2003;18:551–5.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Winblad B, Palmer K, Kivipelto M, et al. Mild cognitive impairment—beyond controversies, towards a consensus: report of the International Working Group on Mild Cognitive Impairment. J Intern Med. 2004;256:240–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Salthouse TA. Does the meaning of neurocognitive change change with age? Neuropsychology. 2010;24:273–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Howieson D, Holm LA, Kaye JA, Oken BS, Howieson J. Neurologic function in the optimally healthy oldest old: neuropsychological evaluation. Neurology. 1993;43:1882–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Cullum CM, Butters N, Troster AI, Salmon DP. Normal aging and forgetting rates on the Wechsler Memory Scale—Revised. Arch Clin Neuropsychol. 1990;5:23–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Busch RM, Chelune GJ, Suchy Y. Using norms in the neuropsychological assessment of the elderly. In: Attix DK, Welsh-Bohmer KA, editors. Geriatric neuropsychology: assessment and intervention. New York: Guilford; 2006. p. 133–57.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Howieson D, Carlson NE, Moore MM, et al. Trajectory of mild cognitive impairment onset. J Int Neuropsychol Soc. 2008;14:192–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Duff K, Beglinger LJ, Moser DJ, Paulsen JS, Schultz SK, Arndt S. Predicting cognitive change in older adults: the relative contribution of practice effects. Arch Clin Neuropsychol. 2010;25:81–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Duff K. Predicting premorbid memory functioning in older adults. Appl Neuropsychol. 2010;17:278–82.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Pearson. Advanced clinical solutions for WAIS-IV and WMS-IV clinical and interpretative manual. San Antonio, TX: Pearson; 2009.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Chelune GJ. Evidence-based research and practice in clinical neuropsychology. Clin Neuropsychol. 2010;24:454–67.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Heilbronner RL, Sweet JJ, Attix DK, Krull KR, Henry GK, Hart RP. Official position of the American Academy of Clinical Neuropsychology on serial neuropsychological assessments: the utility and challenges of repeat test administrations in clinical and forensic contexts. Clin Neuropsychol. 2010;24:1267–78.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Hinton-Bayre AD. Deriving reliable change statistics from test-retest normative data: comparison of models and mathematical expressions. Arch Clin Neuropsychol. 2010;25:244–56.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Stein J, Luppa M, Brahler E, Konig HH, Riedel-Heller SG. The assessment of changes in cognitive functioning: reliable change indices for neuropsychological instruments in the elderly—a systematic review. Dement Geriatr Cogn Disord. 2010;29:275–86.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Chelune GJ. Assessing reliable neuropsychological change. In: Franklin R, editor. Prediction in forensic and neuropsychology: new approaches to psychometrically sound assessment. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum; 2003.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Salthouse TA. Influence of age on practice effects in longitudinal neurocognitive change. Neuropsychology. 2010;24:563–72.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Duff K, Schoenberg MR, Patton D, et al. Regression-based formulas for predicting change in RBANS subtests with older adults. Arch Clin Neuropsychol. 2005;20:281–90.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Lineweaver TT, Chelune GJ. Use of the WAIS-III and WMS-III in the context of serial assessments: interpreting reliable and meaningful change. In: Tulsky DS, Saklofske DH, Chelune GJ, et al., editors. Clinical interpretation of the WAIS-III and WMS-III. New York: Academic; 2003. p. 303–37.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  19. Temkin NR, Heaton RK, Grant I, Dikmen SS. Detecting significant change in neuropsychological test performance: a comparison of four models. J Int Neuropsychol Soc. 1999;5:357–69.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Slick DJ. Psychometrics in neuropsychological assessment. In: Strauss E, Sherman EMS, Spreen O, editors. A compendium of neuropsychological tests. New York, NY: Oxford University Press; 2006. p. 1–43.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Benedict RHB, Zgaljardic DJ. Practice effects during repeated administrations of memory tests with and without alternate forms. J Clin Exp Neuropsychol. 1998;20:339–52.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Beglinger LJ, Gaydos B, Tangphao-Daniels O, et al. Practice effects and the use of alternate forms in serial neuropsychological testing. Arch Clin Neuropsychol. 2005;20:517–29.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Collie A, Darby DG, Falleti MG, Silbert BS, Maruff P. Determining the extent of cognitive change after coronary surgery: a review of statistical procedures. Ann Thorac Surg. 2002;73:2005–11.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Crawford JR. Quantitative aspects of neuropsychological assessment. In: Goldstein LH, McNeil JE, editors. Clinical neuropsychology: a practical guide to assessment and management for clinicians. 2nd ed. Chichester: Wiley; 2011.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Matarazzo JD, Herman DO. Base rate data for the WAIS-R: test-retest stability and VIQ-PIQ differences. J Clin Neuropsychol. 1984;6:351–66.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Hinton-Bayre AD. Methodology is more important than statistics when determining reliable change. J Int Neuropsychol Soc. 2005;11:788–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Chelune GJ, Naugle RI, Luders H, Sedlak J, Awad IA. Individual change after epilepsy surgery: practice effects and base-rate information. Neuropsychology. 1993;7:41–52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. The Psychological Corporation. Updated WAIS-III WMS-III technical manual. San Antonio, TX: The Psychological Corporation; 1997.

    Google Scholar 

  29. McSweeny AJ, Naugle RI, Chelune GJ, Luders H. “T-scores for change”: an illustration of a regression approach to depicting change in clinical neuropsychology. Clin Neuropsychol. 1993;7:300–12.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Maassen GH. Principles of defining reliable change indices. J Clin Exp Neuropsychol. 2000;22:622–32.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Jacobson NS, Truax P. Clinical significance: a statistical approach to defining meaningful change in psychotherapy research. J Consult Clin Psychol. 1991;59:12–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Iverson GL. Interpreting change on the WAIS-III/WMS-III in clinical samples. Arch Clin Neuropsychol. 2001;16:183–91.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Knight RG, McMahon J, Skeaff CM, Green TJ. Reliable Change Index scores for persons over the age of 65 tested on alternate forms of the Rey AVLT. Arch Clin Neuropsychol. 2007;22:513–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Tombaugh TN. Test-retest reliable coefficients and 5-year change scores for the MMSE and 3MS. Arch Clin Neuropsychol. 2005;20:485–503.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Crawford JR, Garthwaite PH. Using regression equations built from summery data in the neuropsychological assessment of the individual case. Neuropsychology. 2007;21:611–20.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Crawford JR, Garthwaite PH, Denham AK, Chelune GJ. Using regression equations built from summary data in the psychological assessment of the individual case: Extension to multiple regression. Psychol Assessment. 2012; in press.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Ivnik RJ, Smith GE, Lucas JA, et al. Testing normal older people three or four times at 1- to 2-year intervals: defining normal variance. Neuropsychology. 1999;13:121–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Attix DK, Story TJ, Chelune GJ, et al. The prediction of change: normative neuropsychological trajectories. Clin Neuropsychol. 2009;23:21–38.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Chelune GJ, Ivnik R, Smith G. Application of reliable change methods for identifying abnormal rates of cognitive decline in dementia. Alzheimers Dement. 2006;2(S1):374.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Crawford JR, Garthwaite PH. Statistical methods for single-case studies in neuropsychology: comparing the slope of a patient’s regression line with those of a control sample. Cortex. 2004;40:533–48.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Darby DG, Pietrzak RH, Fredrickson J, Woodward M, Moore L, Fredrickson A, Sach J, Maruff P. Intra-individual cognitive decline using a brief computerized cognitive screening test. Alzheimers Dement. 2012; 8(2):95–104.

    Google Scholar 

  42. Albert M, Blacker D, Moss MB, Tanzi R, McArdle JJ. Longitudinal change in cognitive performance among individuals with mild cognitive impairment. Neuropsychology. 2007;21:158–69.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Stern Y, Liu X, Albert M, et al. Application of a growth curve approach to modeling the progression of Alzheimer’s disease. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci. 1996;51:M179–84.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Small BJ, Backman L. Longitudinal trajectories of cognitive change in preclinical Alzheimer’s disease: a growth mixture modeling analysis. Cortex. 2007;43:826–34.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Hayden KM, Reed BR, Manly JJ, et al. Cognitive decline in the elderly: an analysis of population heterogeneity. Age Aging. 2011;40(6):684–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Morris JC, Storandt M, Miller JP, et al. Mild cognitive impairment represents early-stage Alzheimer disease. Arch Neurol. 2001;58:397–405.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Amieva H, Le Goff M, Millet X, et al. Prodromal Alzheimer’s disease: successive emergence of the clinical symptoms. Ann Neurol. 2008;64:492–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Petersen RC, Smith GE, Waring SC, Ivnik RJ, Kokmen E, Tangelos EG. Aging, memory, and mild cognitive impairment. Int Psychogeriatr. 1997;9 Suppl 1:65–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Brooks BL, Iverson GL, White T. Substantial risk of “Accidental MCI” in healthy older adults: base rates of low memory scores in neuropsychological assessment. J Int Neuropsychol Soc. 2007;13:490–500.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. de Rotrou J, Wenisch E, Chausson C, Dray F, Faucounau V, Rigaud AS. Accidental MCI in healthy subjects: a prospective longitudinal study. Eur J Neurol. 2005;12:879–85.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. Pedraza O, Smith GE, Ivnik RJ, et al. Reliable change on the Dementia Rating Scale. J Int Neuropsychol Soc. 2007;13:716–20.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Duff K, Beglinger LJ, Van Der Heiden S, et al. Short-term practice effects in amnestic mild cognitive impairment: implications for diagnosis and treatment. Int Psychogeriatr. 2008;20:986–99.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Darby D, Maruff P, Collie A, McStephen M. Mild cognitive impairment can be detected by multiple assessments in a single day. Neurology. 2002;59:1042–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Duff K, Beglinger LJ, Schultz SK, et al. Practice effects in the prediction of long-term cognitive outcome in three patient samples: a novel prognostic index. Arch Clin Neuropsychol. 2007;22:15–24.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. Duff K, Lyketsos CG, Beglinger LJ, et al. Practice effects predict cognitive outcome in amnestic mild cognitive impairment. Am J Geriatr Psychiatry. 2011;19(11):932–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  56. Duff K, Beglinger LJ, Moser DJ, Schultz SK, Paulsen JS. Practice effects and outcome of cognitive training: preliminary evidence from a memory training course. Am J Geriatr Psychiatry. 2010;18:91.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. Zec RF, Markwell SJ, Burkett NR, Larsen DL. A longitudinal study of confrontation naming in the “normal” elderly. J Int Neuropsychol Soc. 2005;11:716–26.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  58. Montse A, Pere V, Carme J, Francesc V, Eduardo T. Visuospatial deficits in Parkinson’s disease assessed by judgment of line orientation test: error analyses and practice effects. J Clin Exp Neuropsychol. 2001;23:592–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  59. Leach L, Kaplan E, Rewilak D, Richards B. Kaplan KBNA baycrest neurocognitive assessment: manual. San Antonio, TX: The Psychological Corporation; 2000.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Neurology, Center for Alzheimer’s Care, Imaging and Research, University of Utah School of Medicine, 650 Komas Drive, Ste. 106a, Salt Lake City, UT, 84108, USA

    Gordon J. Chelune Ph.D., ABPP(CN) & Kevin Duff Ph.D., ABPP(CN)

Authors
  1. Gordon J. Chelune Ph.D., ABPP(CN)
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Kevin Duff Ph.D., ABPP(CN)
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kevin Duff Ph.D., ABPP(CN) .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. East 72 Street, STE 500 428, New York, 10021, New York, USA

    Lisa D. Ravdin

  2. Miller School of Medicine, University of Miami, NW. 14th Street 1120, Miami, 33136, Florida, USA

    Heather L. Katzen

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2013 Springer Science+Business Media, LLC

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Chelune, G.J., Duff, K. (2013). The Assessment of Change: Serial Assessments in Dementia Evaluations. In: Ravdin, L., Katzen, H. (eds) Handbook on the Neuropsychology of Aging and Dementia. Clinical Handbooks in Neuropsychology. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-3106-0_4

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation