↓ Skip to main content

Validating the Cognitive Scale for Down Syndrome (CS-DS) to Detect Longitudinal Cognitive Decline in Adults With Down Syndrome

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychiatry, April 2019
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (79th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (75th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
19 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
62 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Validating the Cognitive Scale for Down Syndrome (CS-DS) to Detect Longitudinal Cognitive Decline in Adults With Down Syndrome
Published in
Frontiers in Psychiatry, April 2019
DOI 10.3389/fpsyt.2019.00158
Pubmed ID
Authors

Carla M. Startin, Bryony Lowe, Sarah Hamburg, Rosalyn Hithersay, Andre Strydom, LonDownS Consortium, Andre Strydom, Elizabeth Fisher, Dean Nizetic, John Hardy, Victor Tybulewicz, Annette Karmiloff-Smith

Abstract

Down syndrome (DS) is associated with intellectual disability and an ultra-high risk of developing dementia. Informant ratings are invaluable to assess abilities and related changes in adults with DS, particularly for those with more severe intellectual disabilities and/or cognitive decline. We previously developed the informant rated Cognitive Scale for Down Syndrome (CS-DS) to measure everyday cognitive abilities across memory, executive function, and language domains in adults with DS, finding CS-DS scores are a valid measure of general abilities, and are significantly lower for those with noticeable cognitive decline compared to those without decline. To further test the validity of the CS-DS in detecting changes associated with cognitive decline we collected longitudinal data across two time points, approximately 1.5-2 years apart, for 48 adults with DS aged 36 years and over. CS-DS total scores (78.83 ± 23.85 vs. 73.83 ± 25.35, p = 0.042) and executive function scores (46.40 ± 13.59 vs. 43.54 ± 13.60, p = 0.048) significantly decreased between the two time points, with scores in the memory domain trending towards a significant decrease (22.19 ± 8.03 vs. 20.81 ± 8.63, p = 0.064). Adults with noticeable cognitive decline at follow-up showed a trend to significantly greater change in total scores (7.81 ± 16.41 vs. 3.59 ± 16.79, p = 0.067) and significantly greater change in executive function scores (5.13 ± 9.22 vs. 1.72 ± 9.97, p = 0.028) compared to those without decline. Change in total scores showed significant correlations with change in scores from other informant measures of everyday adaptive abilities and symptoms associated with dementia, and participant assessment of general cognitive abilities (all p < 0.005), while change in memory scores (R2 = 0.28, p = 0.001) better predicted change in participant cognitive assessment scores than change in executive function (R2 = 0.15, p = 0.016) or language (R2 = 0.15, p = 0.018) scores. These results suggest informants may better detect changes in the executive function domain, while change in informant rated memory scores best predicts change in assessed cognitive ability. Alternatively, memory domain scores may be sensitive to changes across both early and late cognitive decline, whereas executive function domain scores are more sensitive to changes associated with later noticeable cognitive decline. Our results provide further support for the validity of the CS-DS to assess everyday cognitive abilities and to detect associated longitudinal changes in individuals with DS.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 62 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 62 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 21%
Student > Master 10 16%
Researcher 7 11%
Student > Bachelor 4 6%
Other 4 6%
Other 5 8%
Unknown 19 31%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 18 29%
Neuroscience 8 13%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 6%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 5%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 5%
Other 5 8%
Unknown 21 34%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 10 May 2019.
All research outputs
#3,124,657
of 23,146,350 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychiatry
#1,653
of 10,280 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#63,629
of 319,133 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychiatry
#55
of 223 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,146,350 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 86th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 10,280 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.5. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 319,133 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 223 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.