Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38418663›Full record

ArticleNeurological sciences : official journal of the Italian Neurological Society and of the Italian Society of Clinical Neurophysiology2024

Vocabulary knowledge as a reliable proxy of cognitive reserve in multiple sclerosis: a validation study.

Gianpaolo Maggi, Manuela Altieri, Mario Risi, Valentina Rippa, Riccardo Maria Borgo, Rosaria Sacco, Daniela Buonanno, Alessandro D'Ambrosio, Alvino Bisecco, Gabriella Santangelo and 1 more

Open access · hybridAbstract readValidation Study
In one paragraph

Article in Neurological sciences : official journal of the Italian Neurological Society and of the Italian Society of Clinical Neurophysiology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
3.0field-weighted citation impact, top 10% 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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. 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

11 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Gianpaolo MaggiDepartment of Advanced Medical and Surgical Sciences, University of Campania "Luigi Vanvitelli", Naples, Italy.
Manuela AltieriDepartment of Advanced Medical and Surgical Sciences, University of Campania "Luigi Vanvitelli", Naples, Italy. manuela.altieri@unicampania.it.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0483-4478
Mario RisiDepartment of Advanced Medical and Surgical Sciences, University of Campania "Luigi Vanvitelli", Naples, Italy.
Valentina RippaDepartment of Advanced Medical and Surgical Sciences, University of Campania "Luigi Vanvitelli", Naples, Italy.
Riccardo Maria BorgoDepartment of Advanced Medical and Surgical Sciences, University of Campania "Luigi Vanvitelli", Naples, Italy.
Rosaria SaccoDepartment of Neurology, Neurocenter of Southern Switzerland (NSI), Regional Hospital of Lugano, Ente Ospedaliero Cantonale, Lugano, Switzerland.
Daniela BuonannoDepartment of Advanced Medical and Surgical Sciences, University of Campania "Luigi Vanvitelli", Naples, Italy.
Alessandro D'AmbrosioDepartment of Advanced Medical and Surgical Sciences, University of Campania "Luigi Vanvitelli", Naples, Italy.
Alvino BiseccoDepartment of Advanced Medical and Surgical Sciences, University of Campania "Luigi Vanvitelli", Naples, Italy.
Gabriella SantangeloDepartment of Psychology, University of Campania "Luigi Vanvitelli", Caserta, Italy.
Antonio GalloDepartment of Advanced Medical and Surgical Sciences, University of Campania "Luigi Vanvitelli", Naples, Italy.
University of Campania "Luigi Vanvitelli" · ITOspedale regionale di Lugano · CH

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionThe present study aimed to explore the suitability of the vocabulary knowledge (VOC) test as an accurate and reliable proxy of cognitive reserve (CR) by evaluating its psychometric properties and discrimination accuracy compared with other CR measures in multiple sclerosis (MS).

methodsSixty-eight consecutive people with multiple sclerosis (pwMS), followed at our MS outpatient clinic, completed a clinical evaluation and neuropsychological assessment including: VOC, Brief Repeatable Battery of Neuropsychological Tests (BRB-N), Cognitive Reserve Index Questionnaire (CRIq), Beck Depression Inventory-II, and State-Trait Anxiety Inventory. Reliability, convergent and divergent validity, and discrimination accuracy of the VOC were assessed using educational level as reference standard. The possible effects of sociodemographic and clinical factors on VOC and their role in predicting global cognitive status were also explored.

resultsVOC demonstrated good internal consistency (Cronbach's α = 0.894) and adequate construct validity. It showed an acceptable level of discrimination between pwMS with high and low CR, comparable to the CRIq score. Education strongly affected VOC scores, which in turn were independent of MS features. VOC emerged as an independent predictor of global cognitive status together with MS-related disability.

conclusionWe demonstrated the validity of VOC as a reliable CR measure in pwMS. Thus, CR may also be estimated using fixed objective measures, independent of brain pathology and clinical features. Early CR estimation may help clinicians identify pwMS at a higher risk of cognitive decline and plan strict neuropsychological monitoring and cognitive interventions.

Indexed as

Cognitive ReserveMultiple SclerosisNeuropsychological TestsPsychometricsAdultCognitive DysfunctionFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedReproducibility of ResultsVocabularyCognitive reserveMultiple sclerosisReliabilityValidationVocabulary knowledge

Identifiers

PMID38418663
PMCPMC11254959
OpenAlexW4392242555

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.