Ecological relevance of the Iowa gambling task in patients with Alzheimer's disease and mild cognitive impairment
Fiche du document
- ISIDORE Id: 10670/1.e4bda0...
- hal: hal-04336427
- doi: 10.1016/j.neurol.2017.08.003
- PUBMED: 29706297
Ce document est lié à :
info:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/doi/10.1016/j.neurol.2017.08.003
Ce document est lié à :
info:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/pmid/29706297
info:eu-repo/semantics/OpenAccess
Mots-clés
Alzheimer’s disease Awareness Decision-making Mild cognitive impairment Personal autonomy MESH: Aged MESH: Aged, 80 and over MESH: Cognitive Dysfunction MESH: Decision Making MESH: Female MESH: Gambling MESH: Humans MESH: Male MESH: Neuropsychological Tests MESH: Personal Autonomy MESH: Socioeconomic Factors MESH: Alzheimer Disease MESH: AwarenessSujets proches
Relevancy Pertinence Gaming (Gambling) Games of chance Betting Chance, Games ofCiter ce document
Jean-Pierre Jacus et al., « Ecological relevance of the Iowa gambling task in patients with Alzheimer's disease and mild cognitive impairment », HAL SHS (Sciences de l’Homme et de la Société), ID : 10.1016/j.neurol.2017.08.003
Métriques
Partage / Export
Résumé
Background. – In spite of their extensive use, the ecological relevance of tasks dedicated to assessing real-world decision-making in a laboratory setting remains unclear.Objectives. – Our study aimed to evaluate the relationship between decision-making and behavioral competency and awareness of limitations.Methods. – A total of 20 patients with Alzheimer’s disease (AD), 20 with amnestic mild cognitive impairment (aMCI) and 20 healthy controls (HC) were assessed for decisionmaking using the Iowa Gambling Task (IGT). Behavioral competency was evaluated by the Patient Competency Rating Scale (PCRS), which requires each participant and a relative to answer the same 30 questions on participant’s competency and to rate each item, whileawareness of limitations was evaluated by subtracting the self-rated score from the relativerated score.Results. – Using the median-split approach, the proportion of disadvantageous decisionmakers was higher in both the MCI and AD groups than in HC (P = 0.02 and P = 0.03, respectively), with no differences between clinical groups. The percentage of participants with poorer behavioral competency was also higher in the MCI and AD than in the HC (selfrated: P = 0.025 and P = 0.01, respectively; relative-rated: P = 0.008 and P = 0.008, respectively), again with no differences between MCI and AD. All groups were comparable in awareness. For all participants, disadvantageous decision-making was associated with both reduced behavioral competency and poor awareness of limitations (OR: 3.47, P = 0.03 and OR: 5.4, P = 0.004, respectively).Conclusion. – Our findings support the ecological relevance of the IGT. Behavioral competency integrity and awareness of limitations are both associated with advantageous decision-making profiles.
