Intraindividual variability in post-stroke cognition and its relationship with activities of daily living and social functioning: an ecological momentary assessment approach

References

• Katan M, Luft A. Global burden of stroke. Semin Neurol. 2018;38(02):208–211. doi:10.1055/s-0038-1649503.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Duncan PW, Lai SM, Keighley J. Defining post-stroke recovery: implications for design and interpretation of drug trials. Neuropharmacology. 2000;39(5):835–841. doi:10.1016/s0028-3908(00)00003-4.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van Zandvoort MJE, Kessels RPC, Nys GMS, et al. Early neuropsychological evaluation in patients with ischaemic stroke provides valid information. Clin Neurol Neurosurg. 2005;107(5):385–392. doi:10.1016/j.clineuro.2004.10.012.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zinn S, Dudley TK, Bosworth HB, et al. The effect of poststroke cognitive impairment on rehabilitation process and functional outcome. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2004;85(7):1084–1090. doi:10.1016/j.apmr.2003.10.022.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Huang C-Y, Li Y-C, Wang H-K, et al. Stroke suggests increased risk of dementia. Curr Alzheimer Res. 2015;12(3):287–295. doi:10.2174/1567205012666150302155536.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jokinen H, Melkas S, Ylikoski R, et al. Post-stroke cognitive impairment is common even after successful clinical recovery. Euro J Of Neurol. 2015;22(9):1288–1294. doi:10.1111/ene.12743.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Quinn TJ, Elliott E, Langhorne P. Cognitive and mood assessment tools for use in stroke. Stroke. 2018;49(2):483–490. doi:10.1161/STROKEAHA.117.016994.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cicerone KD, Goldin Y, Ganci K, et al. Evidence-based cognitive rehabilitation: systematic review of the literature from 2009 through 2014. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2019;100:1515–1533. 20190326. doi:10.1016/j.apmr.2019.02.011.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Scheffer M, Bolhuis JE, Borsboom D, et al. Quantifying resilience of humans and other animals. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2018;115(47):11883–11890. doi:10.1073/pnas.1810630115.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McKinney TL, Euler MJ, Butner JE. It’s about time: the role of temporal variability in improving assessment of executive functioning. Clin Neuropsychol. 2020;34(4):619–642. doi:10.1080/13854046.2019.1704434.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ram N, Gerstorf D, Lindenberger U, et al. Developmental change and intraindividual variability: Relating cognitive aging to cognitive plasticity, cardiovascular lability, and emotional diversity. Psychol Aging. 2011;26(2):363–371. doi:10.1037/a0021500.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tham W, Auchus AP, Thong M, et al. Progression of cognitive impairment after stroke: one year results from a longitudinal study of Singaporean stroke patients. J Neurol Sci. 2002;203-204:49–52. doi:10.1016/s0022-510x(02)00260-5.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mun CJ, Suk HW, Davis MC, et al. Investigating intraindividual pain variability: methods, applications, issues, and directions. Pain. 2019;160(11):2415–2429. doi:10.1097/j.pain.0000000000001626.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Allard M, Husky M, Catheline GL, et al. Mobile technologies in the early detection of cognitive decline. Plos One. 2014;9(12):e112197. doi:10.1371/JOURNAL.PONE.0112197.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Öhman F, Hassenstab J, Berron D, et al. Current advances in digital cognitive assessment for preclinical Alzheimer’s disease. Alzheimer’s & Dementia: Diagn, Assess & Dis Monit. 2021;13:1–19. doi:10.1002/dad2.12217.
   Google Scholar
• Roalf DR, Quarmley M, Mechanic-Hamilton D, et al. Within-individual variability: An index for subtle change in neurocognition in mild cognitive Iipairment. J Alzheimers Dis. 2016;54(1):325–335. doi:10.3233/JAD-160259.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stone AA, Obbarius A, Junghaenel DU, et al. High-resolution, field approaches for assessing pain: ecological momentary assessment. Pain. 2021;162(1):4–9. doi:10.1097/j.pain.0000000000002049.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moore RC, Campbell LM, Delgadillo JD, et al. Smartphone-based measurement of executive function in older adults with and without HIV. Arch Clin Neuropsychol. 2021;35(4):347–357. doi:10.1093/ARCLIN/ACZ084.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Torous J, Onnela JP, Keshavan M. New dimensions and new tools to realize the potential of RDoC: digital phenotyping via smartphones and connected devices. Transl Psychiatry. 2017;7(3):e1053. doi:10.1038/tp.2017.25.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Powell DJ, McMinn D, Allan JL. Does real time variability in inhibitory control drive snacking behavior? An intensive longitudinal study. Health Psychol. 2017;36(4):356–364. doi:10.1037/hea0000471.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Holzman JB, Bridgett DJ. Heart rate variability indices as bio-markers of top-down self-regulatory mechanisms: a meta-analytic review. Neurosci Biobehav Rev. 2017;74:233–255. doi:10.1016/j.neubiorev.2016.12.032.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bridgett DJ, Burt NM, Edwards ES, et al. Intergenerational transmission of self-regulation: a multidisciplinary review and integrative conceptual framework. Psychol Bull. 2015;141(3):602–654. doi:10.1037/a0038662.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Berger A, Kofman O, Livneh U, et al. Multidisciplinary perspectives on attention and the development of self-regulation. Prog Neurobiol. 2007;82(5):256–286. doi:10.1016/j.pneurobio.2007.06.004.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• MacDonald SW, Li SC, Bäckman L. Neural underpinnings of within-person variability in cognitive functioning. Psychol Aging. 2009;24(4):792–808. doi:10.1037/a0017798.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Heatherton TF, Wagner DD. Cognitive neuroscience of self-regulation failure. Trends Cogn Sci. 2011;15(3):132–139. 20110126. doi:10.1016/j.tics.2010.12.005.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lee Y, Walsh RJ, Fong MWM, et al. Heart rate variability as a biomarker of functional outcomes in persons with acquired brain injury: systematic review and meta-analysis. Neurosci Biobehav Rev. 2021;131:737–754. doi:10.1016/j.neubiorev.2021.10.004.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shea-Shumsky NB, Schoeneberger S, Grigsby J. Executive functioning as a predictor of stroke rehabilitation outcomes. Clin Neuropsychol. 2019;33:854–872. 20190124. doi:10.1080/13854046.2018.1546905.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rullier L, Atzeni T, Husky M, et al. Daily life functioning of community‐dwelling elderly couples: an investigation of the feasibility and validity of ecological momentary assessment. Int J Methods Psych Res. 2014;23(2):208–216. doi:10.1002/mpr.1425.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bui Q, Kaufman KJ, Munsell EG, et al. Smartphone assessment uncovers real-time relationships between depressed mood and daily functional behaviors after stroke. J Telemed Telecare. 2022;2022:1357633X2211000. doi:10.1177/1357633x221100061.
   Google Scholar
• Bui Q, Kaufman KJ, Pham V, et al. Ecological momentary assessment of real-world functional behaviors in individuals with stroke: a longitudinal observational study. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2022;103:1327–1337. 20220309. doi:10.1016/j.apmr.2022.02.011.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cella D, Lai J-S, Nowinski C, et al. Neuro-QOL: brief measures of health-related quality of life for clinical research in neurology. Neurology. 2012;78(23):1860–1867. doi:10.1212/WNL.0b013e318258f744.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gershon RC, Lai JS, Bode R, et al. Neuro-QOL: quality of life item banks for adults with neurological disorders: item development and calibrations based upon clinical and general population testing. Qual Life Res. 2012;21(3):475–486. doi:10.1007/s11136-011-9958-8.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hahn EA, DeVellis RF, Bode RK, et al. Measuring social health in the patient-reported outcomes measurement information system (PROMIS): item bank development and testing. Qual Life Res. 2010;19(7):1035–1044. doi:10.1007/s11136-010-9654-0.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cromwell DA, Eagar K, Poulos RG. The performance of instrumental activities of daily living scale in screening for cognitive impairment in elderly community residents. J Clin Epidemiol. 2003;56(2):131–137. doi:10.1016/s0895-4356(02)00599-1.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Katzan IL, Thompson N, Uchino K. Innovations in stroke: the use of PROMIS and NeuroQoL scales in clinical stroke trials. Stroke. 2016;47(2):e27–e30. doi:10.1161/STROKEAHA.115.011377.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Drozdick LW, Raiford SE, Wahlstrom D, et al. The Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale. 4th ed. New York City, NY: Pearson; 2008.
   Google Scholar
• Tulsky DS, Carlozzi N, Chiaravalloti ND, et al. NIH Toolbox Cognition Battery (NIHTB-CB): list sorting test to measure working memory. J Int Neuropsychol Soc. 2014;20(6):599–610. 20140624. doi:10.1017/S135561771400040X.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Davidson DJ, Zacks RT, Williams CC. Stroop interference, practice, and aging. Neuropsychol Dev Cogn B Aging Neuropsychol Cogn. 2003;10(2):85–98. doi:10.1076/anec.10.2.85.14463.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Reitan RM, Wolfson D. The Halstead-Reitan Neuropsychological Test Battery: Theory and Interpretation. Tucson, AZ: Neuropsychology Press; 1985.
   Google Scholar
• Zelazo PD, Anderson JE, Richler J, et al. NIH Toolbox Cognition Battery (CB): validation of executive function measures in adults. J Int Neuropsychol Soc. 2014;20(6):620–629. 20140624. doi:10.1017/S1355617714000472.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Scarpina F, Tagini S. The stroop color and word test. Front Psychol. 2017;8:557. 20170412. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00557.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carlozzi NE, Tulsky DS, Chiaravalloti ND, et al. NIH Toolbox Cognitive Battery (NIHTB-CB): the NIHTB pattern comparison processing speed test. J Int Neuropsychol Soc. 2014;20(6):630–641. 20140624. doi:10.1017/S1355617714000319.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Benedict RH, Schretlen D, Groninger L, et al. Hopkins verbal learning test–revised: normative data and analysis of inter-form and test-retest reliability. Clin Neuropsychol. 1998;12(1):43–55. doi:10.1076/clin.12.1.43.1726.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dikmen SS, Bauer PJ, Weintraub S, et al. Measuring episodic memory across the lifespan: NIH toolbox picture sequence memory test. J Int Neuropsychol Soc. 2014;20(6):611–619. 20140624. doi:10.1017/S1355617714000460.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boyd JL. A validity study of the hooper visual organization test. J Consult Clin Psychol. 1981;49(1):15–19. doi:10.1037/0022-006X.49.1.15.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kaplan E, Goodglass H, Weintraub S. Boston Naming Test. Austin, TX: Pro-ed; 2001.
   Google Scholar
• Gershon RC, Slotkin J, Manly JJ, et al. IV. NIH toolbox Cognition Battery (CB): measuring language (vocabulary comprehension and reading decoding). Monogr Soc Res Child Dev. 2013;78(4):49–69. doi:10.1111/mono.12034.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fong MWM, Van Patten R, Fucetola RP. The factor structure of the Boston diagnostic aphasia examination, third edition. J Int Neuropsychol Soc. 2019;25(7):772–776. doi:10.1017/S1355617719000237.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Saver JL, Warach S, Janis S, et al. Standardizing the structure of stroke clinical and epidemiologic research data: the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (NINDS) stroke Common Data Element (CDE) project. Stroke. 2012;43(4):967–973. doi:10.1161/STROKEAHA.111.634352.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kleiman EM, Turner BJ, Fedor S, et al. Digital phenotyping of suicidal thoughts. Depress Anxiety. 2018;35(7):601–608. doi:10.1002/da.22730.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tein J-Y, Coxe S, Cham H. Statistical power to detect the correct number of classes in latent profile analysis. Struct Equ Modeling. 2013;20(4):640–657. doi:10.1080/10705511.2013.824781.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nylund KL, Asparouhov T, Muthén BO. Deciding on the number of classes in latent class analysis and growth mixture modeling: a Monte Carlo simulation study. Struct Equ Modeling. 2007;14(4):535–569. doi:10.1080/10705510701575396.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Von Neumann J, Kent R, Bellinson H, et al. The mean square successive difference. Ann Math Statist. 1941;12(2):153–162. doi:10.1214/aoms/1177731746.
   Google Scholar
• Yost KJ, Eton DT, Garcia SF, et al. Minimally important differences were estimated for six patient-reported outcomes measurement information system-cancer scales in advanced-stage cancer patients. J Clin Epidemiol. 2011;64(5):507–516. doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2010.11.018.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Farivar SS, Liu H, Hays RD. Half standard deviation estimate of the minimally important difference in HRQOL scores? Expert Rev Pharm Out Res. 2004;4:515–523. doi:10.1586/14737167.4.5.515.
   Google Scholar
• Antinori A, Arendt G, Becker J, et al. Updated research nosology for HIV-associated neurocognitive disorders. Neurology. 2007;69(18):1789–1799. doi:10.1212/01.WNL.0000287431.88658.8b.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Muthén BO, Muthén LK. Mplus User’s Guide. Los Angeles, CA: Muthén & Muthén; 2021.
   Google Scholar
• R Core Team. R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing; 2013.
   Google Scholar
• Katzan IL, Thompson NR, Uchino K, et al. The most affected health domains after ischemic stroke. Neurology. 2018;90(16):e1364–e1371. doi:10.1212/WNL.0000000000005327.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schmitter-Edgecombe M, Sumida C, Cook DJ. Bridging the gap between performance-based assessment and self-reported everyday functioning: an ecological momentary assessment approach. Clin Neuropsychol. 2020;34(4):678–699. doi:10.1080/13854046.2020.1733097.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kratz AL, Whibley D, Kim S, et al. Fibrofog in daily life: an examination of ambulatory subjective and objective cognitive function in fibromyalgia. Arthritis Care & Res. 2020;72:1669–1677. doi:10.1002/acr.24089.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tesio V, Torta DM, Colonna F, et al. Are fibromyalgia patients cognitively impaired? Objective and subjective neuropsychological evidence. Arthritis Care & Res. 2015;67:143–150. doi:10.1002/acr.22403.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Crochiere RJ, Mangubat CJ, Manasse SM, et al. Does executive function moderate the relation between momentary affective and physical states and subsequent dietary lapse? An EMA investigation. J Behav Med. 2019;42(6):1148–1152. doi:10.1007/s10865-019-00039-y.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brietzke E, Hawken ER, Idzikowski M, et al. Integrating digital phenotyping in clinical characterization of individuals with mood disorders. Neurosci Biobehav Rev. 2019;104:223–230. doi:10.1016/j.neubiorev.2019.07.009.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mote J, Fulford D. Ecological momentary assessment of everyday social experiences of people with schizophrenia: a systematic review. Schizophr Res. 2020;216:56–68. 20191223. doi:10.1016/j.schres.2019.10.021.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kuppens P, Verduyn P. Emotion dynamics. Curr Opin Psychol. 2017;17:22–26. doi:10.1016/j.copsyc.2017.06.004.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Suchy Y. Introduction to special issue: contextually valid assessment of executive functions in the era of personalized medicine. Clin Neuropsychol. 2020;34(4):613–618. doi:10.1080/13854046.2020.1748827.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar