Regression-based norms for the symbol digit modalities test in the Dutch population: Improving detection of cognitive impairment in multiple sclerosis

24Citations
Citations of this article
42Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Background/Aims: Appropriate and timely screening instruments that sensitively capture the cognitive functioning of multiple sclerosis (MS) patients are the need of the hour. We evaluated newly derived regression-based norms for the Symbol Digit Modalities Test (SDMT) in a Dutch-speaking sample, as an indicator of the cognitive state of MS patients. Methods: Regression-based norms for the SDMT were created from a healthy control sample (n = 96) and used to convert MS patients' (n = 157) raw scores to demographically adjusted Z-scores, correcting for the effects of age, age2, gender, and education. Conventional and regression-based norms were compared on their impairment-classification rates and related to other neuropsychological measures. Results: The regression analyses revealed that age was the only significantly influencing demographic in our healthy sample. Regression-based norms for the SDMT more readily detected impairment in MS patients than conventional normalization methods (32 patients instead of 15). Patients changing from an SDMT-preserved to -impaired status (n = 17) were also impaired on other cognitive domains (p < 0.05), except for visuospatial memory (p = 0.34). Conclusions: Regression-based norms for the SDMT more readily detect abnormal performance in MS patients than conventional norms, identifying those patients at highest risk for cognitive impairment, which was supported by a worse performance on other neuropsychological measures.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Burggraaff, J., Knol, D. L., & Uitdehaag, B. M. J. (2017). Regression-based norms for the symbol digit modalities test in the Dutch population: Improving detection of cognitive impairment in multiple sclerosis. European Neurology, 77(5–6), 246–252. https://doi.org/10.1159/000464405

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free