Validation and Normative Data for the Modified Telephone Interview for Cognitive Status: The Sydney Memory and Ageing Study
OBJECTIVES Telephone‐based cognitive screens, such as the Telephone Interview for Cognitive Status (TICS), can potentially reduce the barriers and costs of assessing older adults. However, validation of clinically relevant psychometric properties is lacking in a large and comprehensively assessed sa...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Journal of the American Geriatrics Society (JAGS) 2019-10, Vol.67 (10), p.2108-2115 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
Zusammenfassung: | OBJECTIVES
Telephone‐based cognitive screens, such as the Telephone Interview for Cognitive Status (TICS), can potentially reduce the barriers and costs of assessing older adults. However, validation of clinically relevant psychometric properties is lacking in a large and comprehensively assessed sample of older adults. Furthermore, published normative data may lack sensitivity as they have not used regression‐based demographic corrections or accounted for cases with subsequent dementia. We address these gaps using the modified TICS (TICS‐M; a modified, 13‐item, 39‐point version) and provide an online norms calculator for clinicians and researchers.
DESIGN
Prospective longitudinal study.
SETTING
Sydney, Australia.
PARTICIPANTS
A total of 617 community‐living older adults, aged from 71 to 91 years.
MEASUREMENTS
The measures used included the TICS‐M, the Mini‐Mental State Examination (MMSE), Addenbrooke's Cognitive Examination‐Revised (ACE‐R), and a comprehensive neuropsychological test battery. Descriptive statistics, correlations, area under the curve, and regression analyses were used to determine the validity and normative properties of the TICS‐M.
RESULTS
TICS‐M total scores (mean = 24.20; SD = 3.76) correlated well with the MMSE (0.70) and ACE‐R (0.80) and moderately with neuropsychological tests tested noncontemporaneously. A cutoff score of 21 or lower reliably distinguished between those with and without incident dementia after 1 year (sensitivity = 77%; specificity = 88%) but was less reliable at distinguishing mild cognitive impairment from normal cognition. TICS‐M scores decreased with age and increased with higher education levels. The robust normative sample, which excluded incident dementia cases, scored higher on the TICS‐M and with less variability than the whole sample. An online calculator is provided to compute regression‐based norms and reliable change statistics.
CONCLUSIONS
In a large sample of community‐dwelling older adults, the TICS‐M performed well in terms of construct validity against typical screening tools and neuropsychological measures and diagnostic validity for incident dementia. The comprehensive, regression‐based, and robust normative data provided will help improve the sensitivity, accessibility, and cost‐effectiveness of cognitive testing with older adults. J Am Geriatr Soc 67:2108–2115, 2019 |
---|---|
ISSN: | 0002-8614 1532-5415 |
DOI: | 10.1111/jgs.16033 |