↓ Skip to main content

A one-year follow-up study of the Symbol Digit Modalities Test (SDMT) and the Paced Auditory Serial Addition Test (PASAT) in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis: an appraisal of comparative…

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Neurology, March 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (70th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (64th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
6 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
34 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
111 Mendeley
Title
A one-year follow-up study of the Symbol Digit Modalities Test (SDMT) and the Paced Auditory Serial Addition Test (PASAT) in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis: an appraisal of comparative longitudinal sensitivity
Published in
BMC Neurology, March 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12883-015-0296-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Mariana López-Góngora, Luis Querol, Antonio Escartín

Abstract

Neuropsychological batteries are infrequently used to assess cognitive impairment in multiple sclerosis because they are time-consuming and require trained personnel. The Symbol Digit Modalities Test (SDMT) is suggested to be a useful screening tool to measure cognitive impairment in multiple sclerosis patients and is more valid and reliable over time than the Paced Auditory Serial Addition Test (PASAT). The purpose of this study was to evaluate which of these tests was more sensitive to cognitive impairment at one-year follow-up. A total of 237 patients with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis and 57 healthy controls underwent a complete neuropsychological assessment. One year later, we assessed 196 patients using the Brief Repeatable Battery of Neuropsychological Tests. We also administered other executive function and prospective memory tests, together with fatigue and depression questionnaires. A total of 33.8% of patients were classified as cognitively impaired. The SDMT and the PASAT 3 seconds test (PASAT3) had a sensitivity of 0.809 and 0.783, respectively, thereby classifying patients as cognitively impaired. Analysis of 196 patients one year later showed 31.6% had cognitive impairment compared with 27.6% at the first assessment. The sensitivity to detect cognitive impairment after one year was 0.824 for SDMT and 0.796 for PASAT3. When the predictors were removed from the comparative standard battery, SDMT still showed a slightly higher sensitivity. Both SDMT and PASAT3 correlated significantly with all tests, but SDMT showed higher correlation values. Furthermore, SDMT was completed by all subjects while PASAT3 was completed by 86.9% of patients and 94.7% of controls. SDMT is simpler to administer than PASAT3 and may be slightly more sensitive to MS cognitive impairment. It could thus be a suitable test to assess cognitive impairment routinely in people with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 111 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 2 2%
Germany 1 <1%
Unknown 108 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 20 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 17 15%
Researcher 17 15%
Student > Bachelor 11 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 9 8%
Other 25 23%
Unknown 12 11%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 34 31%
Psychology 24 22%
Neuroscience 14 13%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 5%
Engineering 3 3%
Other 9 8%
Unknown 21 19%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 07 September 2016.
All research outputs
#3,240,938
of 12,222,476 outputs
Outputs from BMC Neurology
#370
of 1,382 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#63,604
of 219,519 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Neurology
#12
of 34 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,222,476 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 73rd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,382 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% 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 219,519 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 34 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 64% of its contemporaries.