1,234
Views
7
CrossRef citations to date
0
Altmetric
Clinical Issues

Robust normative standards for the California Verbal Learning Test (CVLT) ages 60–89: A tool for early detection of memory impairment

, , , , , & show all
Pages 384-405 | Received 01 Oct 2018, Accepted 09 May 2019, Published online: 19 Jul 2019
 

Abstract

Objective: To detect cognitive “impairment,” neuropsychologists rely on normative data to compare patient performance to “normal” peers. However, the true normality of normative samples may be called into question given the high prevalence of preclinical proteinopathies amongst clinically normal older adults. Given its common use in memory clinics, we aimed to develop a robust California Verbal Learning Test (CVLT) normative standard reflecting only the most cognitively stable sample of older adults available.

Method: Two hundred and twenty-eight older adults (mean age = 69.9, range = 60–89, 91% White, mean education = 17.6 years) who were clinically normal at baseline and demonstrated clinical stability on longitudinal assessment completed the CVLT at baseline. We applied a standardized algorithm to convert raw scores into normalized scaled scores and then regressed on age, sex, and education using fractional polynomial modeling.

Results: There were significant main effects of age and sex across CVLT metrics, but not education. Means and standard deviations were higher and less variable in our robust normative data than the data used to create the CVLT-II and CVLT-3 normative standards.

Conclusions: These norms set a higher standard for what should be considered “normal” in the spectrum of age-related memory changes and may help clinicians identify patients with memory and potential neurodegenerative changes in the earliest stages, further optimizing clinical management and clinical trial stratification. As with any standard, these robust norms are only appropriately utilized with patients that closely match the demographic profile of the individuals represented in the sample used for this study.

Acknowledgments

This study was supported by NIH-NIA grants K23AG058752 (PI: Casaletto), L30AG057123 (PI: Casaletto),1R01AG032289 (PI: Joel Kramer), and R01AG048234 (PI: Joel Kramer). Our work was also supported by Larry L. Hillblom Network Grant (PI: Joel Kramer; 2014-A-004-NET) and Fellowship Grant (PI: Casaletto; 2017-A-004-FEL). We also thank Abraham Sprague for his help in creating the normative tables.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

Log in via your institution

Log in to Taylor & Francis Online

PDF download + Online access

  • 48 hours access to article PDF & online version
  • Article PDF can be downloaded
  • Article PDF can be printed
USD 53.00 Add to cart

Issue Purchase

  • 30 days online access to complete issue
  • Article PDFs can be downloaded
  • Article PDFs can be printed
USD 462.00 Add to cart

* Local tax will be added as applicable

Related Research

People also read lists articles that other readers of this article have read.

Recommended articles lists articles that we recommend and is powered by our AI driven recommendation engine.

Cited by lists all citing articles based on Crossref citations.
Articles with the Crossref icon will open in a new tab.