Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35175287›Full record

ArticleArchives of clinical neuropsychology : the official journal of the National Academy of Neuropsychologists2022

Validation of and Demographically Adjusted Normative Data for the Learning Ratio Derived from the RAVLT in Robustly Intact Older Adults.

Dustin B Hammers, Robert J Spencer, Liana G Apostolova, Alzheimer’s Disease Neuroimaging Initiative

Erratum issuedAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Archives of clinical neuropsychology : the official journal of the National Academy of Neuropsychologists, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Incremental validity of the test of practical judgment (TOP-J) in the prediction of diagnosis in preclinical dementia.Neuropsychology, development, and cognition. Section B, Aging, neuropsychology and cognition · 2025
    Article
  3. Evaluating practice effects across learning trials - ceiling effects or something more?Journal of clinical and experimental neuropsychology · 2024
    Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Learning slopes in early-onset Alzheimer's disease.Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association · 2023
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Dustin B HammersDepartment of Neurology, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, IN, USA.
Robert J SpencerMental Health Service, VA Ann Arbor Healthcare System, Ann Arbor MI, USA.
Liana G ApostolovaDepartment of Neurology, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, IN, USA.
Alzheimer’s Disease Neuroimaging Initiative

Funding

Project 1U19AG024904 · NIA · NORTHERN CALIFORNIA INSTITUTE/RES/EDU · PI MONICA G. RIVERA-MINDT · 2016 to 2026
$226.7M
Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative - SupplementU01AG024904 · NIA · NORTHERN CALIFORNIA INSTITUTE RES &EDUC · PI WEINER, MICHAEL W · 2004 to 2015
$121.0M
National Centralized Repository for Alzheimer's Disease and Related Dementias (NCRAD)U24AG021886 · NIA · INDIANA UNIV-PURDUE UNIV AT INDIANAPOLIS · PI TATIANA M. FOROUD · 2002 to 2026
$119.8M
NIA NIH HHS U01 AG024904NIA NIH HHS U19 AG024904NIA NIH HHS U24 AG021886
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe learning ratio (LR) is a novel learning slope score that was developed to identify learning more accurately by considering the proportion of information learned after the first trial of a multi-trial learning task. Specifically, LR is the number of items learned after trial one divided by the number of items yet to be learned. Although research on LR has been promising, convergent validation, clinical characterization, and demographic norming of this LR metric are warranted to understand its clinical utility when derived from the Rey Auditory Verbal Learning Test (RAVLT).

methodData from 674 robustly cognitively intact older participants from the Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (aged 54- 89) were used to calculate the LR metric. Comparison of LR's relationship with standard memory measures was undertaken relative to other traditional learning slope metrics. In addition, retest reliability at 6, 12, and 24 months was examined, and demographically adjusted normative comparisons were developed.

resultsLower LR scores were associated with poorer performances on memory measures, and LR scores outperformed traditional learning slope calculations across all analyses. Retest reliability exceeded acceptability thresholds across time, and demographically adjusted normative equations suggested better performance for cognitively intact participants than those with mild cognitive impairment.

conclusionsThese results suggest that this LR score possesses sound retest reliability and can better reflect learning capacity than traditional learning slope calculations. With the added development and validation of regression-based normative comparisons, these findings support the use of the RAVLT LR as a clinical tool to inform clinical decision-making and treatment.

Indexed as

Cognitive DysfunctionVerbal LearningAgedHumansMemory and Learning TestsNeuropsychological TestsReproducibility of ResultsAlzheimer’s diseaseLearningMemoryMild cognitive impairment

Identifiers

PMID35175287
PMCPMC9618160

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.