Normative data for the Spanish version of the California Verbal Learning Test (TAVEC) from older adults.

Abstract

The aim of this study was to establish normative data for the Spanish version of the California Verbal Learning Test, the Test de Aprendizaje Verbal Espa ña-Complutense (TAVEC). Through different subtests, the TAVEC allows verbal learning and episodic memory to be evaluated, an assessment that was carried out on a sample of 382 cognitive healthy Spanish individuals aged 60-90 years old. Unlike the participant's educational level, their age and sex significantly influenced performance in the TAVEC. We provide tables that allow the scaled scores obtained with this test to be adjusted for age and other tables with the relevant adjustments for sex. The normative data obtained in this study will help more precisely interpret the performance of older Spanish adults in the TAVEC, enhancing the utility of this neuropsychological test to evaluate verbal learning and episodic memory in clinical settings and in relation to healthy aging. Public Significance StatementThe present study provides updated normative data for the Spanish version of the California Verbal Learning Test, the Test de Aprendizaje Verbal España-Complutense (TAVEC) in Spanish older adults. The norms produced here are age and sex adjusted, enhancing the utility of this neuropsychological test to evaluate verbal learning and episodic memory in both clinical and research contexts.

Normative data for the Spanish versions of the CVLT, WMS-Logical Memory, and RBMT from a sample of middle-aged and old participants.

“…Consequently, we conducted a series of simulations using hypothetical cases of people with a certain age, sex, and educational level, to which we attributed different direct scores for each measure. The simulations show that the data reported by García-Herranz et al (2022) attribute poorer performance to the same direct score than our data. Regarding LM-I and LM-II, the sample used by Brugulat-Serrat et al (2021) does not include participants over 70 years old or with less than 8 years of schooling, and tables with adjustments are also provided separately.…”

“…Due to differences related to the sample, methodology, and data presentation, it is difficult to compare the previous published standards of the three tests. Regarding the TAVEC, García-Herranz et al (2022) used a similar sample to that used the present study, but provided tables with separate adjustments (for age and sex), unlike in the present study. Direct comparison of the equivalences of raw scores and the SS or percentiles is therefore impossible.…”

“…Normative data for the main recall measures of the TAVEC have recently been published (García-Herranz et al, 2022), but no error measures (such as intrusions) were considered. The sample characteristics are similar to those of our sample ( N = 382, age range 60–90), but recruitment was limited to a single urban region in Spain (Community of Madrid).…”

“…It has been pointed out that some error measures in tests based on lists of words (intrusions or false positives) are helpful in predicting and discriminating objective cognitive impairment (Campos-Magdaleno et al, 2016; Davis et al, 2002; Montero et al, 2017; Thomas et al, 2018). Normative data for the TAVEC in the Spanish population have recently been published (García-Herranz et al, 2022). However, the reported data differ slightly from other international CVLT normative data, due to the lack of inclusion of any error measure in the aforementioned study (which focused only on recall measures) and the sample recruited (382 participants aged 60–90 years old involved in active aging programs in the north of the Community of Madrid).…”

Concurrent serum lead levels and cognitive function in older adults

“…The participants in NHANES were given a practice verbal fluency test with the clothing category to become familiar with the rules. The AFT has been shown to differentiate between normal cognition, mild cognitive impairment, and probable Alzheimer's disease in older people with a sensitivity of 98.8% (García-Herranz et al, 2020). A score of fewer than 15 points indicates Alzheimer's disease following dementia in the memory clinic setting (Canning et al, 2004).…”