Capturing daily-life executive impairments in adults: Does the choice of neuropsychological tests matter?

Schaeffer, Morgan J; Weerawardhena, Himanthri; Becker, Sara; Callahan, Brandy L.

doi:10.1080/23279095.2022.2109970

Cited by 2 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 56 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, findings about MSET’s ability to predict daily functioning have been mixed. Specifically, while some studies demonstrated associations of the MSET with behavioral measures (Alderman et al, 2003; Chevignard et al, 2008; Conti & Brucki, 2018; Frisch et al, 2012) and rating scales of IADLs or daily EF lapses (Allain et al, 2014; Burgess et al, 1998; Clark et al, 2000; Emmanouel et al, 2014; Jovanovski et al, 2012; Lamberts et al, 2010; Renison et al, 2012; Rochat et al, 2009), others yielded null results (e.g., Bertens et al, 2016; Gilboa et al, 2014; Jovanovski et al, 2012; Norris & Tate, 2000; Romundstad et al, 2022; Roy et al, 2015; Schaeffer et al, 2022). Despite this mixed evidence, MSET is routinely described as being “ecologically valid,” implying that its ability to predict daily life has been well documented (e.g., Espinosa et al, 2009; O’Shea et al, 2010; de Almeida et al, 2014; Spitoni et al, 2018; Verdejo-García & Pérez-García, 2007; Wilson et al, 1998).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Six elements test vs D-KEFS: what does “Ecological Validity” tell us?

Suchy,

Gereau Mora,

Brothers

et al. 2024

J Int Neuropsychol Soc

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: Extensive research shows that tests of executive functioning (EF) predict instrumental activities of daily living (IADLs) but are nevertheless often criticized for having poor ecological validity. The Modified Six Elements Test (MSET) is a pencil-and-paper test that was developed to mimic the demands of daily life, with the assumption that this would result in a more ecologically valid test. Although the MSET has been extensively validated in its ability to capture cognitive deficits in various populations, support for its ability to predict functioning in daily life is mixed. This study aimed to examine the MSET’s ability to predict IADLs assessed via three different modalities relative to traditional EF measures. Method: Participants (93 adults aged 60 – 85) completed the MSET, traditional measures of EF (Delis-Kaplan Executive Function System; D-KEFS), and self-reported and performance-based IADLs in the lab. Participants then completed three weeks of IADL tasks at home, using the Daily Assessment of Independent Living and Executive Skills (DAILIES) protocol. Results: The MSET predicted only IADLs completed at home, while the D-KEFS predicted IADLs across all three modalities. Further, the D-KEFS predicted home-based IADLs beyond the MSET when pitted against each other, whereas the MSET did not contribute beyond the D-KEFS. Conclusions: Traditional EF tests (D-KEFS) appear to be superior to the MSET in predicting IADLs in community-dwelling older adults. The present results argue against replacing traditional measures with the MSET when addressing functional independence of generally high-functioning and cognitive healthy older adult patients.

show abstract