Objective: Prospective memory (PM) is the ability to remember to perform future intentions. Previous studies have demonstrated that, compared to a younger cohort, healthy older adults have impairments in PM. Considering the importance of early detection of age-related PM decline, the present study aims to compare the performance of healthy older adults using three well-known PM tests commonly used in clinical settings. Method: In the present study, we tested 70 older adults (65–95 years old) using the Cambridge Prospective Memory Test (CAMPROMPT), the Memory for Intentions Screening Test (MIST) and the Royal Prince Alfred Prospective Memory Test (RPA-ProMem). In order to compare performance across tests and the interaction between age and cues, we performed a linear mixed model with random intercept and random slopes. Moreover, additional mixed models with random intercept were run for analyzing the additional information provided by MIST and RPA-ProMem regarding delay responses, response modality effects and type of errors committed. Results: Our data showed a drop in PM performance as age increased detected by all three tests. Furthermore, CAMPROMPT was the most sensitive test to identify differences in PM for event-and time-based cues, at least for participants with 65–77 years old. When data were analyzed in term of delay responses, participants were more accurate for 2 min delay (MIST) and 30 in delay (RPA-ProMem). Participants were less accurate when response modality was “verbal” compared to “action” (MIST) and made more PM errors as age increased. Conclusions: Overall, the study provides important information regarding age-related PM decline and can help researchers as well as clinicians in deciding the preferred test to evaluate PM performance.

Comparing different tests to detect early manifestation of prospective memory decline in aging

Mioni G.
;
Stablum F.
2022

Abstract

Objective: Prospective memory (PM) is the ability to remember to perform future intentions. Previous studies have demonstrated that, compared to a younger cohort, healthy older adults have impairments in PM. Considering the importance of early detection of age-related PM decline, the present study aims to compare the performance of healthy older adults using three well-known PM tests commonly used in clinical settings. Method: In the present study, we tested 70 older adults (65–95 years old) using the Cambridge Prospective Memory Test (CAMPROMPT), the Memory for Intentions Screening Test (MIST) and the Royal Prince Alfred Prospective Memory Test (RPA-ProMem). In order to compare performance across tests and the interaction between age and cues, we performed a linear mixed model with random intercept and random slopes. Moreover, additional mixed models with random intercept were run for analyzing the additional information provided by MIST and RPA-ProMem regarding delay responses, response modality effects and type of errors committed. Results: Our data showed a drop in PM performance as age increased detected by all three tests. Furthermore, CAMPROMPT was the most sensitive test to identify differences in PM for event-and time-based cues, at least for participants with 65–77 years old. When data were analyzed in term of delay responses, participants were more accurate for 2 min delay (MIST) and 30 in delay (RPA-ProMem). Participants were less accurate when response modality was “verbal” compared to “action” (MIST) and made more PM errors as age increased. Conclusions: Overall, the study provides important information regarding age-related PM decline and can help researchers as well as clinicians in deciding the preferred test to evaluate PM performance.
File in questo prodotto:
Non ci sono file associati a questo prodotto.
Pubblicazioni consigliate

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11577/3352682
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? 0
  • Scopus 2
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 2
social impact