Search

ObjectivesThis study aimed at exploring (1) the motor and non-motor correlates of counterfactual thinking (CFT) abilities in non-demented amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) patients and (2) the ability of CFT measures to discriminate these patients from healthy controls (HCs) and patients with and without cognitive impairment.MethodsN = 110 ALS patients and N = 51 HCs were administered two CFT tasks, whose sum, resulting in a CFT Index (CFTI), was addressed as the outcome. Patients further underwent an in-depth cognitive, behavioral, and motor-functional evaluation. Correlational analyses were run to explore the correlates of the CFTI in patients. Logistic regressions were performed to test whether the CFTI could discriminate patients from HCs.ResultsThe CFTI was selectively associated (p ≤ 0.005) with fluency and memory subscales of the Edinburgh Cognitive and Behavioral ALS Screen (ECAS), but not with other variables. CFTI scores discriminated patients from HCs (p < 0.001) with high accuracy (82%), but not patients with a normal vs. defective performance on the ECAS-Total.ConclusionCFT measures in non-demented ALS patients were associated with verbal fluency and memory functions, and they were also able to discriminate them from HCs.

BackgroundThe present investigation aimed at testing the psychometrics and diagnostics of the Italian version of the Caregiver Behavioral Questionnaire (CBQ) from the ALS Cognitive Behavioral Screen (ALS-CBS™), as well as its case–control discrimination, in a cohort of non-demented patients with ALS.MethodsThe caregivers of N = 265 non-demented patients with ALS and N = 99 healthy controls (HCs) were administered the CBQ and the Edinburgh Cognitive and Behavioural ALS Screen-Carer Interview (ECAS-CI). For N = 98 patients, an in-depth behavioural/psychopathological assessment via the Frontal Behavioural Inventory (FBI), the Dimensional Apathy Scale (DAS), the State and Trait Anxiety Inventory-Form Y (STAI-Y), and the Beck Depression Inventory (BDI) was also available. Factorial and construct validity, internal reliability, and diagnostics against an abnormal ECAS-CI score were tested in patients. Case–control discrimination was explored through logistic regression.ResultsThe CBQ was internally reliable (McDonald’s ω = 0.90) and underpinned by a simple, unidimensional structure; it converged with ECAS-CI, FBI, and DAS scores and diverged from STAI-Y and BDI ones. A cutoff of ≤ 33 accurately detected abnormal ECAS-CI scores (AUC = 0.85), yielding optimal error- and information-based diagnostics. The CBQ was independent of demographic and disease-related variables and discriminated patients from HCs (p < 0.001).DiscussionThe Italian version of the CBQ from the ALS-CBS™ is a valid, reliable, diagnostically sound, and feasible screener for detecting frontotemporal-like behavioural changes in non-demented patients with ALS. Its adoption is thus recommended within clinical practice and research in the view of providing preliminary information on whether the administration of more extensive behavioural instruments is needed.

BackgroundThe aim of this study was to explore the construct validity and diagnostic properties of the Reading the Mind in the Eyes Test (RMET) in non-demented patients with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS).MaterialsA total of 61 consecutive patients and 50 healthy controls (HCs) were administered the 36-item RMET. Additionally, patients underwent a comprehensive assessment of social cognition via the Story-Based Empathy Task (SET), which encompasses three subtests targeting Causal Inference, Emotion Attribution (SET-EA), and Intention Attribution (SET-IA), as well as global cognitive [the Edinburgh Cognitive and Behavioral ALS Screen (ECAS)] and behavioral screening [the Frontal Behavioral Inventory (FBI); the Dimensional Apathy Scale (DAS); the Beck Depression Inventory (BDI); and the State and Trait Anxiety Inventory-Y]. The construct validity of the RMET was tested by regressing it within a stepwise model that encompassed as predictors the abovementioned cognitive and behavioral measures, covarying for demographic and motor confounders. Receiver-operating characteristics (ROC) analyses allowed exploring intrinsic and post-test properties of the RMET both in discriminating patients from HCs and in identifying patients with a defective SET-EA performance.ResultsThe RMET was solely predicted by the SET-EA (p = 0.003) and SET-IA (p = 0.005). RMET scores showed high accuracy both in discriminating patients from HCs (AUC = 0.81) and in identifying patients with a defective SET-EA score (AUC = 0.82), with adequate-to-optimal both intrinsic and post-test properties.DiscussionThe RMET is a convergently and divergently valid measure of affective social cognition in non-demented ALS patients, also featuring optimal intrinsic and post-test diagnostic properties in both case-control and case-finding scenarios.

BackgroundThis study aimed at assessing the diagnostic properties of the Frontal Assessment Battery (FAB) as to its capability to (1) discriminate healthy controls (HCs) from patients with Huntington’s disease (HD) and (2) identify cognitive impairment in this population.MaterialsThirty-eight consecutive HD patients were compared to 73 HCs on the FAB. Patients further underwent the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) and the Unified Huntington’s Disease Rating Scale (UHDRS). Receiver-operating characteristics (ROC) analyses were run to assess both intrinsic—i.e., sensitivity (Se) and specificity (Sp), and post-test diagnostics, positive and negative predictive values (PPV; NPV) and likelihood ratios (LR+; LR–), of the FAB both in a case–control setting and to identify, within the patient cohort, cognitive impairment (operationalized as a below-cut-off MoCA score). In patients, its diagnostic accuracy was also compared to that of the cognitive section of the UHDRS (UHDRS-II).ResultsThe FAB and UHDRS-II were completed by 100 and 89.5% of patients, respectively. The FAB showed optimal case–control discrimination accuracy (AUC = 0.86–0.88) and diagnostic properties (Se = 0.68–0.74; Sp = 0.88–0.9; PPV = 0.74–0.8; NPV = 0.84–0.87; LR+ = 5.6–7.68; LR– = 0.36–0.29), performing even better (AUC = 0.9–0.91) at identifying cognitive impairment among patients (Se = 0.73–1; Sp = 0.86–0.71; PPV = 0.79–0.71; NPV = 0.82–1; LR+ =5.13–3.5; LR– = 0.31–0) and comparably to the UHDRS-II (89% vs. 85% of accuracy, respectively; p = 0.46).DiscussionIn HD patients, the FAB is highly feasible for cognitive screening aims, being also featured by optimal intrinsic/post-test diagnostics within both case-control and case-finding settings.

BackgroundThis study aimed at testing the ability of the frontal assessment battery (FAB) to differentiate between patients with mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and dementia due to Alzheimer’s disease (AD), as well as comparing its discriminative power to that of the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE).MethodsThe present retrospective cohort included N = 107 Aβ-positive patients diagnosed with either MCI due to AD (N = 40) or probable AD dementia (ADD; N = 67). A two-step multiple logistic regression (MLR) was run to predict an MCI vs. ADD diagnosis based on FAB scores. Within the baseline step, demographics, disease duration, MMSE scores, and information on cognitive phenotypes were entered, with the FAB being added within the second step. Receiver-operating characteristics analyses were also run to derive intrinsic and post-test diagnostics.ResultsWithin the baseline MLR step, only lower MMSE scores predicted the occurrence of ADD; by adding the FAB, which likewise was able to discriminate between MCI and ADD (p = 0.016), a significant increase in model fit was detected (p = 0.007). The diagnostic efficiency of the FAB (AUC = 0.85) was comparable (p = 0.583) to that of the MMSE (AUC = 0.82), also yielding good intrinsic and post-test diagnostics, which were comparable to those of the MMSE.DiscussionThe FAB is a diagnostically sound screener to discriminate between MCI and ADD, independently of patients’ overall cognitive profile. In doing so, the FAB is comparable to the MMSE, and the complementation of the latter with the former is advisable in order to increase the accuracy in differentiating between MCI and ADD within screening sessions.

BackgroundThe present study aimed at (1) assessing the diagnostic properties of the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) in non-demented ALS patients and at (2) exploring the MoCA administrability according to motor-functional status.MaterialsN = 348 patients were administered the MoCA and Edinburgh Cognitive and Behavioural ALS Screen (ECAS). Administrability rates and prevalence of defective MoCA scores were compared across King’s and Milano-Torino clinical stages. Regression models were run to test whether the non-administrability of the MoCA and a defective score on it were predicted, net of the ECAS-Total, by disease duration, ALS Functional Rating Scale-Revised (ALSFRS-R) and progression rate, computed as (48: ALSFRS-R)/disease duration. Intrinsic and post-test diagnostics were tested against a below-cut-off ECAS-total score.ResultsThe 79.9% of patients successfully underwent the MoCA, whose administrability rates decreased with advanced clinical stages, at variance with its defective score prevalence. The probability of the FAB not being administrable was predicted only by lower ALSFRS-R-bulbar and-upper-limb scores; no motor features, but the ECAS-Total, predicted a defective MoCA performance. The MoCA showed high accuracy (AUC = 0.82) and good intrinsic and post-test properties—being slightly more specific than sensitive.DiscussionIn non-demented ALS patients, the MoCA is featured by optimal diagnostics as a screener for cognitive impairment, especially for ruling-out its occurrence, as long as patients are in the early stages of the disease and have sufficiently spared bulbar and upper-limb functions.

Background: The understanding of factors that shape risk perception is crucial to modulate the perceived threat and, in turn, to promote optimal engagement in preventive actions.Methods: An on-line, cross-sectional, survey was conducted in Italy between May and July 2020 to investigate risk perception for COVID-19 and the adoption of preventive measures. A total of 964 volunteers participated in the study. Possible predictors of risk perception were identified through a hierarchical multiple linear regression analysis, including sociodemographic, epidemiological and, most of all, psychological factors. A path analysis was adopted to probe the possible mediating role of risk perception on the relationship between the independent variables considered and the adoption of preventive measures.Results: Focusing on the psychological predictors of risk perception, high levels of anxiety, an anxious attachment, and an external locus of control predicted higher perceived risk. Conversely, high levels of openness personality and of avoidant attachment predicted a lower perception of risk. In turn, the higher was the perceived risk the higher was the adoption of precautionary measures. Furthermore, psychological factors influenced the adoption of preventive behaviors both directly and indirectly through their effect on risk perception.Conclusions: Our findings might be taken into high consideration by stakeholders, who are responsible for promoting a truthful perception of risk and proper compliance with precautionary measures.

Introduction: The observed association between depressive symptoms and cognitive performances has not been previously clarified in patients with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (pALS). In fact, the use of cognitive measures often not accommodating for motor disability has led to heterogeneous and not conclusive findings about this issue. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the relationship between cognitive and depressive/anxiety symptoms by means of the recently developed Edinburgh Cognitive and Behavioral ALS Screen (ECAS), a brief assessment specifically designed for pALS.Methods: Sample included 168 pALS (114 males, 54 females); they were administered two standard cognitive screening tools (FAB; MoCA) and the ECAS, assessing different cognitive domains, including ALS-specific (executive functions, verbal fluency, and language tests) and ALS non-specific subtests (memory and visuospatial tests). Two psychological questionnaires for depression and anxiety (BDI; STAI/Y) were also administered to patients. Pearson’s correlation coefficient was used to assess the degree of association between cognitive and psychological measures.Results: Depression assessment negatively correlated with the ECAS, more significantly with regard to the executive functions subdomain. In particular, Sentence Completion and Social Cognition subscores were negatively associated with depression levels measured by BDI total score and Somatic-Performance symptoms subscore. Conversely, no significant correlations were observed between depression level and cognitive functions as measured by traditional screening tools for frontal abilities (FAB) and global cognition (MoCA) assessment. Finally, no significant correlations were observed between state/trait anxiety and the ECAS.Discussion and conclusion: This represents the first study focusing on the relationship between cognitive and psychological components in pALS by means of the ECAS, the current gold standard for ALS cognitive-behavioral assessment. If confirmed by further investigations, the observed association between depression and executive functions suggests the need for a careful screening and treatment of depression, to avoid overestimation of cognitive involvement and possibly improve cognitive performances in ALS.