Telephone-based Frontal Assessment Battery (t-FAB): standardization for the Italian population and clinical usability in neurological diseases
Aging Clinical and Experimental Research, ISSN: 1720-8319, Vol: 34, Issue: 7, Page: 1635-1644
2022
- 8Citations
- 16Captures
Metric Options: Counts1 Year3 YearSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Citations8
- Citation Indexes8
- Captures16
- Readers16
- 16
Article Description
Background: Despite the relevance of telephone-based cognitive screening tests in clinical practice and research, no specific test assessing executive functioning is available. The present study aimed at standardizing and providing evidence of clinical usability for the Italian telephone-based Frontal Assessment Battery (t-FAB). Methods: The t-FAB (ranging 0–12), comprising two subtests, has two versions: one requiring motor responses (t-FAB-M) and the other verbal responses (t-FAB-V). Three hundred and forty-six Italian healthy adults (HPs; 143 males; age range = 18–96 years; education range = 4–23 years) and 40 participants with neurological diseases were recruited. To HPs, the t-FAB was administered along with a set of telephone-based tests: MMSE, verbal fluency (VF), backward digit span (BDS). The in-person version of the FAB was administered to both HPs and clinical groups. Factorial structure, construct validity, inter-rater and test–retest reliability, t-FAB-M vs. t-FAB-V equivalence and diagnostic accuracy were assessed. Norms were derived via Equivalent Scores. Results: In HPs, t-FAB measures yielded high inter-rater/test–retest reliability (ICC =.78–.94), were internally related (p ≤.005) and underpinned by a single component, converging with the telephone-based MMSE, VF, BDS (p ≤.0013). The two t-FAB versions were statistically equivalent in clinical groups (ps of both equivalence bounds <.001). Education predicted all t-FAB scores (p <.001), whereas age only the t-FAB-M score (p ≤.004). t-FAB scores converge with the in-person FAB in HPs and clinical groups (r =.43–.78). Both t-FAB versions were accurate in discriminating HPs from the clinical cohort (AUC =.73-.76). Discussion: The t-FAB is a normed, valid, reliable and clinically usable telephone-based cognitive screening test to adopt in both clinical and research practice.
Bibliographic Details
http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85131803591&origin=inward; http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s40520-022-02155-3; http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35699839; https://link.springer.com/10.1007/s40520-022-02155-3; https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s40520-022-02155-3; https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s40520-022-02155-3
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know