Assessment of judgment ability in a Brazilian sample of patients with mild cognitive impairment and dementia

Abstract

ABSTRACT. Judgment is the ability to make sound decisions after consideration of relevant information, possible solutions, likely outcomes, and contextual factors. Loss of judgment is common in patients with mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and dementia. The Test of Practical Judgment (TOP-J) evaluates practical judgment in adults and the elderly, with 15- and 9-item versions that require individuals to listen to scenarios about everyday problems and report their solutions. Objective: Adaptation of TOP-J for a Brazilian sample, preparation of a reduced version and verification of the accuracy of both. Methods: Eighty-five older adults, including 26 with MCI, 20 with Alzheimer’s disease (AD), 15 with frontotemporal dementia behavioral variant (FTDbv) and 24 controls, underwent neuropsychological assessment including the Brazilian adaptation of the TOP-J (TOP-J-Br). Results: On both TOP-J-Br versions, controls outperformed MCI, AD and FTDbv patients (p<0.001) and MCI outperformed AD and FTDbv (p<0.001). For the TOP-J/15-Br, the best cutoff for distinguishing controls and patients had a sensitivity of 91.7%, specificity of 59.0% and area under the curve of 0.8. For the TOP-J/9-Br, the best cutoff for distinguishing controls and patients had a sensitivity of 79.9%, specificity of 72.1% and area under the curve of 0.82. Conclusion: The TOP-J/15-Br, and particularly the TOP-J/9-Br, showed robust psychometric properties and the potential for clinical utility in Brazilian older adults at various stages of neurodegenerative cognitive decline.

A systematic review of cognitive and behavioral tools to differentiate behavioral variant frontotemporal dementia from other conditions

“…The remaining 91 studies were rated low quality according to the QUADAS-2 appraisal. [15][16][17][18][19][20][21][22][23][24][25][26][27][28][29][30][31][32][33][34][36][37][38][39][40][41][42][43][44][45][46][47][48][49][50]52,[54][55][56][57][58][59][60][61][62][63][64][102][103][104][105][106]…”

“…The titles and abstracts were reviewed, with 633 articles identified that potentially met inclusion criteria. These articles were then reviewed in full, yielding 96 articles that met eligibility criteria 15–110 (Figure 1).…”

“…In contrast, though the TOP-J also had excellent test performance, this was only reported by one study. 44 Differentiating bvFTD from AD, there was considerable variation in performance of executive function tests. Although some tools were reported to have good to excellent test performance, these findings were generally based on single studies.…”

“…(i) 15-20,25-28,30,36-39,41-44,46,48-50,52,54,55,57-59,62-64,67-70,72-76, 78-80,83,87-89,91,95-100,102,103,105-108,110 (ii) 21,24,29,[32][33][34][35]40,45,47,51,53,56,61,65,71,77,81,82,84,86,90,93,94,101 (iii) 22,31,60,66,85,92,104,109 (iv) 23 (v) 17,18,21,22,25,37,39,41,44,46,47,52,57,58,60,64,…”

“…Executive function (Table 2). Thirty studies of low-quality according to the QUADAS-2 appraisal [15][16][17][18][19][20][21][22][23][24][25][26][27][28][29][30][31][32][33][34][36][37][38][39][40][41][42][43][44][45] 130 phonemic fluency, and the Test of Practical Judgment (TOP-J). 131 As mentioned, however, these results were either inconsistent or supported by single-study findings.…”