2 results
34 Variability in RBANS Performance and Neurocognitive Impairment in Older Adults with Cognitive Concerns
- Kimberly T. L. King, Phillip Ruppert, Lauren Olson, Charlotte Payne, Jeffrey D. David Kaufman, Gfeller
-
- Journal:
- Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society / Volume 29 / Issue s1 / November 2023
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 21 December 2023, pp. 715-716
-
- Article
-
- You have access Access
- Export citation
-
Objective:
Risk factors that contribute to brain pathology and cognitive decline among older adults include demographic factors (e.g., age, educational attainment), genetic factors, health factors, and depression (Plassman et al., 2010). Variability within an individual’s performance across cognitive tasks is referred to as dispersion (Hultsch et al., 2002), which appears sensitive to subtle cognitive impairments associated with neurodegenerative pathology in older adults (Bangen et al., 2019; Kälin et al., 2014). Thaler and colleagues (2015) found that dispersion across domains of the Repeatable Battery for the Assessment of Neuropsychological Status (RBANS) was a useful indicator of cognitive changes associated with cardiovascular disease and mortality. Also, research by Manning and colleagues (2021) found that elevated ratings of depression and anxiety in older adults was associated with greater dispersion across neuropsychological testing. The present study aimed to replicate findings that greater dispersion in neuropsychological performance is associated with impaired neurocognitive performance and greater self-reported depression among older adults who present for neuropsychological evaluation with cognitive concerns.
Participants and Methods:Neuropsychological testing data was obtained from a university hospital. Chart reviews were conducted on 369 participants who met initial criteria (60 years or older with testing data from the RBANS Form A, Wechsler Test of Adult Reading, and Geriatric Depression Scale [GDS]). Retrospective analyses were conducted on a final sample of 293 participants from 60 to 94 years old (Mage = 74.41, SDage = 7.43; 179 females, 114 males). Diagnoses were used for group comparisons between cognitively intact individuals with subjective cognitive complaints (SCC, n = 49), persons with Mild Neurocognitive Disorder (mND, n =137), and persons with Major Neurocognitive Disorder (MND, n = 107).
Results:As expected, results indicated that higher dispersion was related to lower Total RBANS Scores (r = -0.54, p < .001) and significant differences across diagnostic groupings (F(2, 289) = 29.19, p < 0.001; SCC, mND, MND) indicated that variability in performance was an indicator of greater neurocognitive impairment. Contrary to expectations, greater dispersion was very weakly associated with lower reported depressive symptomatology (r = -0.13, p = 0.03). A three-stage hierarchical linear regression was conducted with the RBANS Coefficient of Variation (CoV) as the dependent variable and three predictor variables (Age, Total RBANS, Total GDS). The regression analysis results indicated that age was not a significant predictor, but both Total RBANS and GDS Scores were. The most important predictor was Total RBANS Scores which uniquely explained 21% of the variation in dispersion.
Conclusions:This study adds to the current literature regarding the clinical utility of dispersion in neuropsychological performance as an indicator of early and subtle neurocognitive impairment. Depressive symptom reporting was expected to help predict the degree of variability, but this factor was only weakly associated with the RBANS CoV.
Limitations of this study include its retrospective use of archival data and the restricted range on some variables of interest. Further research is needed to examine the relative utility of different measures of dispersion and why increased cognitive performance variability is related to neurocognitive impairment and decline.
36 Reactivity to Loss and Its Relationship to Clinical Symptoms of ADHD in Adults
- Lauren T. Olson, David A.S. Kaufman, Fred W. Sabb, Edythe D. London, Robert M. Bilder
-
- Journal:
- Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society / Volume 29 / Issue s1 / November 2023
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 21 December 2023, pp. 643-644
-
- Article
-
- You have access Access
- Export citation
-
Objective:
Individuals with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) exhibit deficits in reward-based learning, which have important implications for behavioral regulation. Prior research has shown that these individuals show altered patterns of risky decision-making, which may be partially explained as a function of dysfunctional reactivity to rewards and punishments. However, research findings on the relationships between ADHD and punishment sensitivity have been mixed. The current study used the Balloon Analog Risk Task (BART) to examine risky decision-making in adults with and without ADHD, with a particular interest in characterizing the manner in which participants react to loss.
Participants and Methods:612 individuals (Mage = 31.04, SDage = 78.77; 329 females, 283 males) were recruited through the UCLA Consortium for Neuropsychiatric Phenomics (CNP). All participants were administered the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV-TR (SCID-IV), which provided diagnoses used for group comparisons between adults with ADHD (n = 35) and healthy controls (n = 577). A computerized BART paradigm was used to examine impulsivity and risky decision-making, while participants also completed the Barratt Impulsiveness Scale (BIS-11), and ADHD participants completed the Adult Self-Report Scale-V1.1 (ASRS-V1.1). The BART presented two colors of balloons with differing probabilities of exploding, and participants were incentivized to pump the balloons as many times as possible without causing them to explode. The primary endpoint was "mean adjusted pumps", determined as mean across trials of the number of pumps on trials that did not end in explosion. An index of reactivity to loss was calculated as the difference between the mean adjusted pumps following an explosion and the mean adjusted pumps following trials in which the balloon did not explode.
Results:The ADHD and control groups did not differ on mean adjusted pumps across trials, but they did differ in their reactivity to explosion of balloons that followed the most pumps, incurring the greatest level of loss (F(1, 551) = 7.1, p < 0.01). Interestingly, ADHD participants showed a greater reactivity to loss on these balloons than controls (p < 0.05), indicating that they reduced their number of pumps following balloon explosions more than controls. For participants as a whole, there were small correlations between loss reactivity and scales of everyday impulsivity on the BIS-II (ps < 0.05). For ADHD participants, loss reactivity was unrelated to symptoms of inattention but was significantly correlated with symptoms of hyperactivity/impulsivity (p = 0.01) and total ADHD symptoms (p < 0.05) on the ASRS-V1.1.
Conclusions:In the context of a risky decision-making task, adults with ADHD showed greater reactivity to loss than controls, despite showing comparable patterns of overall performance during the BART. The magnitude of behavioral adjustment following loss was correlated with symptoms of hyperactivity/impulsivity in adults with ADHD, suggesting that loss sensitivity is clinically related to impulsive behavior in everyday life. These findings help to expand our understanding of motivational processing in ADHD and suggest new insight into the ways in which everyday symptoms of ADHD are related to sensitivity to losses and punishments.