Composite Indices of the Color-Picture Version of Boston Naming Test Have Better Discriminatory Power: Reliability and Validity in a Chinese Sample with Diverse Neurodegenerative Diseases
Restricted accessResearch articleFirst published online June 27, 2023
Composite Indices of the Color-Picture Version of Boston Naming Test Have Better Discriminatory Power: Reliability and Validity in a Chinese Sample with Diverse Neurodegenerative Diseases
The Boston Naming Test (BNT) is the most widely used measure to assess anomia. However, it has been criticized for failing to differentiate the underlying cognitive process of anomia.
Objective:
We validated the color-picture version of BNT (CP-BNT) in a sample with diverse neurodegenerative dementia diseases (NDDs). We also verified the differential ability of the composite indices of CP-BNT across NDDs groups.
Methods:
The present study included Alzheimer’s disease (n = 132), semantic variant primary progressive aphasia (svPPA, n = 53), non-svPPA (n = 33), posterior cortical atrophy (PCA, n = 35), and normal controls (n = 110). We evaluated psychometric properties of CP-BNT for the spontaneous naming (SN), the percentage of correct responses on semantic cuing and word recognition cuing (% SC, % WR). Receiver operating characteristic analysis was used to examine the discriminatory power of SN alone and the composite indices (SN, % SC, and % WR).
Results:
The CP-BNT had sufficient internal consistency, good convergent, divergent validity, and criterion validity. Different indices of CP-BNT demonstrated distinct cognitive underpinnings. Category fluency was the strongest predictor of SN (β= 0.46, p < 0.001). Auditory comprehension tests highly associated with % WR (Sentence comprehension: β= 0.22, p = 0.001; Word comprehension: β= 0.20, p = 0.001), whereas a lower visuospatial score predicted % SC (β= –0.2, p = 0.001). Composite indices had better predictability than the SN alone when differentiating between NDDs, especially for PCA versus non-svPPA (area under the curve increased from 63.9% to 81.2%).
Conclusion:
The CP-BNT is a highly linguistically relevant test with sufficient reliability and validity. Composite indices could provide more differential information beyond SN and should be used in clinical practice.
RabinLA, PaolilloE, BarrWB (2016) Stability in test-usage practices of clinical neuropsychologists in the United States and Canada over a 10-year period: A follow-up survey of INS and NAN members. Arch Clin Neuropsychol31, 206–230.
2.
GleichgerrchtE, FridrikssonJ, BonilhaL (2015) Neuroanatomical foundations of naming impairments across different neurologic conditions. Neurology85, 284–292.
3.
DronkersNF, IvanovaMV, BaldoJV (2017) What do language disorders reveal about brain-language relationships? From classic models to network approaches. J Int Neuropsychol Soc23, 741–754.
HarryA, CroweSF (2014) Is the Boston Naming Test still fit for purpose?Clin Neuropsychol28, 486–504.
6.
ArdilaA (1995) Directions of research in cross-cultural neuropsychology. J Clin Exp Neuropsychol17, 143–150.
7.
CheungRW, CheungMC, ChanAS (2004) Confrontation naming in Chinese patients with left, right or bilateral brain damage. J Int Neuropsychol Soc10, 46–53.
8.
GuoQH, HongZ, SiWX, SunY, LvCZ (2006) Boston naming test in Chinese elderly patient with mild cognitive impairment and Alzheimer’s disease. Chin Mental Health J20, 81–84.
9.
LiD, YuYY, HuN, ZhangM, LiuL, FanLM, RuanSS, WangF (2022) A color-picture version of Boston Naming Test outperformed the black-and-white version in discriminating amnestic mild cognitive impairment and mild Alzheimer’s disease. Front Neurol13, 884460.
10.
ChenTB, LinCY, LinKN, YehYC, ChenWT, WangKS, WangPN (2014) Culture qualitatively but not quantitatively influences performance in the Boston naming test in a chinese-speaking population. Dement Geriatr Cogn Dis Extra4, 86–94.
11.
MeteyardL, BoseA (2018) What does a cue do? Comparing phonological and semantic cues for picture naming in aphasia. J Speech Lang Hear Res61, 658–674.
12.
BalthazarML, CendesF, DamascenoBP (2008) Semantic error patterns on the Boston Naming Test in normal aging, amnestic mild cognitive impairment, and mild Alzheimer’s disease: Is there semantic disruption?Neuropsychology22, 703–709.
LeytonCE, Landin-RomeroR, LiangCT, BurrellJR, KumforF, HodgesJR, PiguetO (2019) Correlates of anomia in non-semantic variants of primary progressive aphasia converge over time. Cortex120, 201–211.
15.
MontembeaultM, BrambatiSM, JoubertS, BoukadiM, ChapleauM, LaforceRJ, WilsonMA, MacoirJ, RouleauI (2017) Naming unique entities in the semantic variant of primary progressive aphasia and Alzheimer’s disease: Towards a better understanding of the semantic impairment. Neuropsychologia95, 11–20.
16.
VolkmerA, Farrington-DouglasC, CrutchS, BeekeS, WarrenJ, YongK (2022) Better conversations: A language and communication intervention for aphasia in posterior cortical atrophy. Neurocase28, 356–363.
17.
Suarez-GonzalezA, CassaniA, GopalanR, StottJ, SavageS (2021) When it is not primary progressive aphasia: A scoping review of spoken language impairment in other neurodegenerative dementias. Alzheimers Dement (N Y)7, e12205.
18.
AlbertMS, DeKoskyST, DicksonD, DuboisB, FeldmanHH, FoxNC, GamstA, HoltzmanDM, JagustWJ, PetersenRC, SnyderPJ, CarrilloMC, ThiesB, PhelpsCH (2011) The diagnosis of mild cognitive impairment due to Alzheimer’s disease: Recommendations from the National Institute on Aging-Alzheimer’s Association workgroups on diagnostic guidelines for Alzheimer’s disease. Alzheimers Dement7, 270–279.
19.
McKhannGM, KnopmanDS, ChertkowH, HymanBT, JackCRJr., KawasCH, KlunkWE, KoroshetzWJ, ManlyJJ, MayeuxR, MohsRC, MorrisJC, RossorMN, ScheltensP, CarrilloMC, ThiesB, WeintraubS, PhelpsCH (2011) The diagnosis of dementia due to Alzheimer’s disease: Recommendations from the National Institute on Aging-Alzheimer’s Association workgroups on diagnostic guidelines for Alzheimer’s disease. Alzheimers Dement7, 263–269.
LuJ, LiD, LiF, ZhouA, WangF, ZuoX, JiaXF, SongH, JiaJ (2011) Montreal cognitive assessment in detecting cognitive impairment in Chinese elderly individuals: A population-based study. J Geriatr Psychiatry Neurol24, 184–190.
22.
JinHM, LiD, YuYY, ZhangM, LiuXN, LiFY, WuLY, WangF (2019) [Features of a modified WHO/UCLA AVLT performance in amnestic mild cognitive impairment and mild Alzheimer’s disease]. Zhonghua Yi Xue Za Zhi99, 2423–2428.
23.
LiD, ZhaoLN, JinHM, ZhangM, GuoDM, YuYY, WuLY, TangY, LiFY, ZhouAH, HanY, JiaJP (2016) [Profiles of cognitive and language impairment of logopenic and non-fluent variant of primary progressive aphasia]. Zhonghua Yi Xue Za Zhi96, 2356–2359.
24.
(2018) Academy of Cognitive Disorder of China.The Clinical Dementia Rating (simplified Chinese). Chin J Geriatr37, 367–371.
25.
GaltonCJ, PattersonK, GrahamK, Lambon-RalphMA, WilliamsG, AntounN, SahakianBJ, HodgesJR (2001) Differing patterns of temporal atrophy in Alzheimer’s disease and semantic dementia. Neurology57, 216–225.
26.
DurantJ, BergJL, BanksSJ, KaylegianJ, MillerJB (2021) Comparing the Boston Naming Test with the neuropsychological assessment battery-naming subtest in a neurodegenerative disease clinic population. Assessment28, 1256–1266.
27.
GuglielmiV, QuarantaD, MegaI, CostantiniEM, CarrariniC, InnocentiA, MarraC (2020) Semantic priming in mild cognitive impairment and healthy subjects: Effect of different time of presentation of word-pairs. J Pers Med10, 57.
28.
EllendtS, VobetaB, KohnN, WagelsL, GoerlichKS, DrexlerE, SchneiderF, HabelU (2017) Predicting stability of mild cognitive impairment (MCI): Findings of a community based sample. Curr Alzheimer Res14, 608–619.
29.
JefferiesE, ThompsonH, CornelissenP, SmallwoodJ (2020) The neurocognitive basis of knowledge about object identity and events: Dissociations reflect opposing effects of semantic coherence and control. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci375, 20190300.
30.
RalphMA, JefferiesE, PattersonK, RogersTT (2017) The neural and computational bases of semantic cognition. Nat Rev Neurosci18, 42–55.
31.
HoffmanP, McClellandJL, LambonRalph MA (2018) Concepts, control, and context: A connectionist account of normal and disordered semantic cognition. Psychol Rev125, 293–328.
32.
ClarkeA, TaylorKI, DevereuxB, RandallB, TylerLK (2013) From perception to conception: How meaningful objects are processed over time. Cereb Cortex23, 187–197.
33.
TallbergIM (2005) The Boston Naming Test in Swedish: Normative data. Brain Lang94, 19–31.
34.
BonilhaL, HillisAE, HickokG, denOuden DB, RordenC, FridrikssonJ (2017) Temporal lobe networks supporting the comprehension of spoken words. Brain140, 2370–2380.
35.
ForsethKJ, KadipasaogluCM, ConnerCR, HickokG, KnightRT, TandonN (2018) A lexical semantic hub for heteromodal naming in middle fusiform gyrus. Brain141, 2112–2126.
36.
QuJ, PangY, LiuX, CaoY, HuangC, MeiL (2022) Task modulates the orthographic and phonological representations in the bilateral ventral Occipitotemporal cortex. Brain Imaging Behav16, 1695–1707.
37.
ButtsAM, MachuldaMM, MartinP, PrzybelskiSA, DuffyJR, Graff-RadfordJ, KnopmanDS, PetersenRC, JackCRJr., LoweVJ, JosephsKA, WhitwellJL (2022) Temporal cortical thickness and cognitive associations among typical and atypical phenotypes of Alzheimer’s disease. J Alzheimers Dis Rep6, 479–491.
