Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2017 Oct 5;130(19):2283-2290.
doi: 10.4103/0366-6999.215326.

Development and Standardization of a New Cognitive Assessment Test Battery for Chinese Aphasic Patients: A Preliminary Study

Affiliations

Development and Standardization of a New Cognitive Assessment Test Battery for Chinese Aphasic Patients: A Preliminary Study

Ji-Bao Wu et al. Chin Med J (Engl). .

Abstract

Background: Nonlinguistic cognitive impairment has become an important issue for aphasic patients, but currently there are few neuropsychological cognitive assessment tests for it. To get more information on cognitive impairment of aphasic patients, this study aimed to develop a new cognitive assessment test battery for aphasic patients, the Non-language-based Cognitive Assessment (NLCA), and evaluate its utility in Chinese-speaking patients with aphasia.

Methods: The NLCA consists of five nonverbal tests, which could assess five nonlinguistic cognitive domains such as visuospatial functions, attention test, memory, reasoning, and executive functions of aphasic patients. All tests are modified from the nonverbal items of the current existed tests with some changes to the characteristics of Chinese culture. The NLCA was tested in 157 participants (including 57 aphasic patients, 50 mild cognitive impairment (MCI) patients, and 50 normal controls), and was compared with other well-established relative neuropsychological tests on the reliability, validity, and utility.

Results: The NLCA was fully applicable in the MCI patients and the normal controls, almost working in the aphasic patients (57/62 patients, 91.9%). The NLCA scores were 66.70 ± 6.30, 48.67 ± 15.04, and 77.58 ± 2.56 for the MCI group, the aphasic group, and the control group, respectively , and a significant difference was found among three groups (F = 118.446, P < 0.001). The Cronbach's alpha of the NLCA as an index of internal consistency was 0.805, and the test-retest and interrater reliability was adequate (r=0.977 and r= 0.970, respectively). The correlations of the cognitive subtests and their validation instruments were between 0.540 and 0.670 (all P < 0.05). Spearman's correlation analysis indicated that the coefficient of internal consistency of each subtest itself was higher than other subtests. When choosing the Montreal Cognitive Assessment score of <26 as the diagnostic criteria of cognitive impairment, the area under the curve for all participants in the control and MCI groups was 0.942 (95% confidence interval: 0.895-0.989), and an optimal cutoff point of 75.00 seemed to provide the best balance between sensitivity and specificity. Age (r = -0.406, P < 0.001) was the main influence factor for the NLCA.

Conclusions: The NLCA could efficiently differentiate the cognitive impairment patients from the normal controls and is a reliable and valid cognitive assessment test battery to specially find nonlinguistic cognitive function for aphasic patients.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

There are no conflicts of interest.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Stimulus material and templates for five subtests of the Non-language-based Cognitive Assessment: (a) visuospatial function subtest: Spatial orientation (left side) and the Ghent overlapping figures (right side); (b) reasoning subtest: One example column and three of the test task columns (below side); (c) memory subtest: Stimulus (below side) and templates for the short-delay recognition task (upside); (d) attention subtest: Target items and example (below side); (e) executive function subtest: Target graphical models (right side) and example task (left side).
Figure 2
Figure 2
The receiver operating characteristics of Non-language-based Cognitive Assessment for the recognition of cognitive impairment patients while choosing Beijing version of the Montreal Cognitive Assessment as the diagnosic criteria.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Bonini MV, Radanovic M. Cognitive deficits in post-stroke aphasia. Arq Neuropsiquiatr. 2015;73:840–7. doi: 10.1590/0004-282X20150133. - PubMed
    1. Yu ZZ, Jiang SJ, Bi S, Li J, Lei D, Sun LL. Relationship between linguistic functions and cognitive functions in a clinical study of Chinese patients with post-stroke aphasia. Chin Med J. 2013;126:1252–6. doi: 10.3760/cma.j.issn.0366-6999.20121463. - PubMed
    1. Seniów J, Litwin M, Lesniak M. The relationship between non-linguistic cognitive deficits and language recovery in patients with aphasia. J Neurol Sci. 2009;283:91–4. doi: 10.1016/j.jns.2009.02.315. - PubMed
    1. Murray LL. Attention and other cognitive deficits in aphasia: Presence and relation to language and communication measures. Am J Speech Lang Pathol. 2012;21:S51–64. doi: 10.1044/1058-0360(2012/11-0067) - PubMed
    1. Brownsett SL, Warren JE, Geranmayeh F, Woodhead Z, Leech R, Wise RJ. Cognitive control and its impact on recovery from aphasic stroke. Brain. 2014;137(Pt 1):242–54. doi: 10.1093/brain/awt289. - PMC - PubMed