Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36186334›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in psychology2022

A comparison of techniques for deriving clustering and switching scores from verbal fluency word lists.

Justin Bushnell, Diana Svaldi, Matthew R Ayers, Sujuan Gao, Frederick Unverzagt, John Del Gaizo, Virginia G Wadley, Richard Kennedy, Joaquín Goñi, David Glenn Clark

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
1.6field-weighted citation impact, top 16% of its field
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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Multivariate word properties in fluency tasks reveal markers of Alzheimer's dementia.Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association · 2024
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Justin BushnellDepartment of Neurology, Indiana University, Indianapolis, IN, United States.
Diana SvaldiDepartment of Neurology, Indiana University, Indianapolis, IN, United States.
Matthew R AyersDepartment of Psychiatry, Richard L. Roudebush VA Medical Center, Indianapolis, IN, United States.
Sujuan GaoDepartment of Biostatistics, Indiana University, Indianapolis, IN, United States.
Frederick UnverzagtDepartment of Psychology, Indiana University, Indianapolis, IN, United States.
John Del GaizoBiomedical Informatics Center, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, SC, United States.
Virginia G WadleyDepartment of Medicine, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, United States.
Richard KennedyDepartment of Medicine, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, United States.
Joaquín GoñiWeldon School of Biomedical Engineering, Purdue University, West-Lafayette, IN, United States.
David Glenn ClarkDepartment of Neurology, Indiana University, Indianapolis, IN, United States.
Indiana University – Purdue University Indianapolis · USUniversity of Alabama at Birmingham · USMedical University of South Carolina · USPurdue University West Lafayette · US

Funding

VCID and Stroke in a Bi-racial National CohortU01NS041588 · NINDS · UNIVERSITY OF ALABAMA AT BIRMINGHAM · PI CUSHMAN, MARY, HOWARD, GEORGE · 2002 to 2022
$96.0M
Research Education ComponentP30AG010133 · NIA · INDIANA UNIV-PURDUE UNIV AT INDIANAPOLIS · PI SAYKIN, ANDREW J · 1991 to 2020
$37.3M
Research Education ComponentP30AG072976 · NIA · INDIANA UNIVERSITY INDIANAPOLIS · PI ANDREW J SAYKIN · 2021 to 2026
$24.1M
NIA NIH HHS P30 AG010133NIA NIH HHS P30 AG072976NINDS NIH HHS U01 NS041588
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective: To compare techniques for computing clustering and switching scores in terms of agreement, correlation, and empirical value as predictors of incident cognitive impairment (ICI). Methods: We transcribed animal and letter F fluency recordings on 640 cases of ICI and matched controls from a national epidemiological study, amending each transcription with word timings. We then calculated clustering and switching scores, as well as scores indexing speed of responses, using techniques described in the literature. We evaluated agreement among the techniques with Cohen's κ and calculated correlations among the scores. After fitting a base model with raw scores, repetitions, and intrusions, we fit a series of Bayesian logistic regression models adding either clustering and switching scores or speed scores, comparing the models in terms of several metrics. We partitioned the ICI cases into acute and progressive cases and repeated the regression analysis for each group. Results: For animal fluency, we found that models with speed scores derived using the slope difference algorithm achieved the best values of the Watanabe-Akaike Information Criterion (WAIC), but with good net reclassification improvement (NRI) only for the progressive group (8.2%). For letter fluency, different models excelled for prediction of acute and progressive cases. For acute cases, NRI was best for speed scores derived from a network model (3.4%), while for progressive cases, the best model used clustering and switching scores derived from the same network model (5.1%). Combining variables from the best animal and letter F models led to marginal improvements in model fit and NRI only for the all-cases and acute-cases analyses. Conclusion: Speed scores improve a base model for predicting progressive cognitive impairment from animal fluency. Letter fluency scores may provide complementary information.

Indexed as

Bayesian analysisdementia – Alzheimer’s diseaselanguageneuropsychologyverbal fluency

Identifiers

PMID36186334
PMCPMC9518694
OpenAlexW4295763084

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.