Cognitive impairment is common amongst many neurodegenerative movement disorders such as Huntington's disease (HD) and Parkinson's disease (PD) across multiple domains. There are many tasks available to assess different aspects of this dysfunction, however, it is imperative that these show high test-retest reliability if they are to be used to track disease progression or response to treatment in patient populations. Moreover, in order to ensure effects of practice across testing sessions are not misconstrued as clinical improvement in clinical trials, tasks which are particularly vulnerable to practice effects need to be highlighted. In this study we evaluated test-retest reliability in mean performance across three testing sessions of four tasks that are commonly used to measure cognitive dysfunction associated with striatal impairment: a combined Simon Stop-Signal Task; a modified emotion recognition task; a circle tracing task; and the trail making task. Practice effects were seen between sessions 1 and 2 across all tasks for the majority of dependent variables, particularly reaction time variables; some, but not all, diminished in the third session. Good test-retest reliability across all sessions was seen for the emotion recognition, circle tracing, and trail making test. The Simon interference effect and stop-signal reaction time (SSRT) from the combined-Simon-Stop-Signal task showed moderate test-retest reliability, however, the combined SSRT interference effect showed poor test-retest reliability. Our results emphasize the need to use control groups when tracking clinical progression or use pre-baseline training on tasks susceptible to practice effects.
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 12 January 2018.
All research outputs
#16,135,635
of 26,874,583 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#15,736
of 35,730 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#243,944
of 456,637 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#317
of 544 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,874,583 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 35,730 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 54% 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 456,637 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 544 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
