Abstract
Background In older adults with amnestic Mild Cognitive Impairment (aMCI), the Cambridge Neuropsychological Test Automated Battery (CANTAB) probes indicated cognitive impairments most frequently in memory.
Objectives This study aimed to investigate a) the cognitive features of aMCI using memory CANTAB tests and b) whether the clinical diagnosis of aMCI can be externally validated by these CANTAB measurements.
Methods We tested CANTAB tests that are specific to aMCI on 65 healthy controls and 66 people with aMCI who were diagnosed using Petersen’s criteria. These tests were spatial working memory (SWM), visual pattern recognition memory (PRM), delayed matching to sample (DSM), spatial span (SSP), and rapid visual information processing (RVP).
Results The key aMCI features are impairments in PRM and DSM, whilst deficits in SSP and RVP are other, albeit somewhat less important features of aMCI. Nevertheless, neural network analyses including 10 CANTAB domains specific for MCI showed that only 70.8 percent of all subjects were properly identified with a sensitivity of 77.3%, specificity of 65.4% and an area under the ROC curve of 0.760. K-means cluster analysis using the same specific CANTAB test scores discovered 2 clusters with an adequate silhouette measure of cohesion and separation including a cluster with 36 subjects showing impairments in most neurocognitive tests.
Conclusion Deficits in spatial working, pattern recognition and visuospatial working memory as well as rapid visual information processing are key features of aMCI. Nevertheless, the clinical diagnosis of aMCI according to Petersen’s criteria is overinclusive because too many healthy controls are allocated to this group.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
This study did not receive any funding.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
Approval for the study was obtained from the Institutional Review Board of Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok, Thailand.
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
The dataset generated during and/or analyzed during the current study will be available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request and once the dataset has been fully exploited by the authors.