Background: The availability of fine-grained, culture-specific psychometric outcomes can favor the interpretation of scores of the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA), the most frequently used instrument to screen for mild cognitive dysfunctions in both instrumental and non-instrumental domains. This study thus aimed at providing: (i) updated, region-specific norms for the Italian MoCA, by also (ii) comparing them to pre-existing ones with higher geographical coverage; (iii) information on sensitivity and discriminative capability at the item level. Methods: Five hundred and seventy nine healthy individuals from Northern Italy (208 males, 371 females; age: 63.4 ± 15, 21–96; education: 11.3 ± 4.6, 1–25) were administered the MoCA. Item Response Theory (IRT) was adopted to assess item difficulty and discrimination. Normative values were derived by means of the Equivalent Scores (ESs) method, applied to the MoCA and its sub-scales. Average ESs were also computed. Agreement with previous ESs classification was assessed via Cohen’s k. Results: Age and education significantly predicted all MoCA measures except for Orientation, which was related to age only. No sex differences were detected when tested along with age and education. Substantial disagreements with previous ESs classifications were detected. Several items proved to be scarcely sensitive, especially the place item from Orientation and the letter detection task. Memory items showed high discriminative capability, along with certain items assessing executive functions and orientation. Discussion: Item-level information herewith provided for the Italian MoCA can help interpret its scores by Italian practitioners. Italian practitioners should consider an adaptive use of region-specific norms for the MoCA.

Background: Deficits of executive functioning (EF) are frequently found in neurological disorders. The Frontal Assessment Battery (FAB) is one of the most widespread and psychometrically robust EF screeners in clinical settings. However, in Italy, FAB norms date back to 15 years ago; moreover, its validity against “EF-loaded” global cognitive screeners (e.g., the Montreal Cognitive Assessment, MoCA) has yet to be tested. This study thus aimed at (a) providing updated normative data for the Italian FAB and (b) assessing its convergent validity with the MoCA. Methods: Four-hundred and seventy-five healthy Italian native speakers (306 females, 169 males; mean age: 61.08 ± 15.1; mean education: 11.67 ± 4.57) were administered by the MoCA and the FAB. FAB items were divided into three subscales: FAB-1 (linguistically mediated EF), FAB-2 (planning), and FAB-3 (inhibition). Regression-based norms were derived (equivalent scores) for all FAB measures. Results: Age and education were predictive of all FAB measures, whereas no gender differences were detected. The FAB and its sub-scales were related to MoCA measures—the strongest associations being found with MoCA total and MoCA-EF scores. FAB sub-scales were both internally related and associated with FAB total scores. Discussion: The FAB proved to have convergent validity with both global cognitive and EF measures in healthy individuals. The present study provides updated normative data for the FAB and its sub-scales in an Italian population sample, and thus supports an adaptive usage of this EF screener.

Background: Norming neuropsychological tests and standardizing their raw scores are needed to draw objective clinical judgments on clients’ neuropsychological profile. The Equivalent Score (ES) method is a regression-based normative/standardization technique that relies on the non-parametric identification of the observations corresponding to the outer and inner tolerance limits (oTL; iTL) — to derive a cut-off, as well as to between-ES thresholds — to mark the passage across different levels of ability. However, identifying these observations is still a time-consuming, “manual” procedure. This work aimed at providing practitioners with a user-friendly code that helps compute TLs and ES thresholds.Methods: R language and RStudio environment were adopted. A function for identifying the observations corresponding to both TLs by exploiting Beta distribution features was implemented. A code for identifying the observations corresponding to ES thresholds according to az-deviate-based approach is also provided.Results: An exhaustive paradigm of usage of both the aforementioned function and script has been carried out. A user-friendly, online applet is provided for the calculation of both TLs and ESs thresholds. A brief summary of the regression-based procedure preceding the identification of TLs and ESs threshold is also given (along with an R script implementing these steps).Discussion: The present work provides with a software solution to the calculation of TLs and ES thresholds for norming/standardizing neuropsychological tests. These software can help reduce both the subjectivity and the error rate when applying the ES method, as well as simplify and expedite its implementation.

Background Due to SARS-CoV-2-related encephalopathic features, COVID-19 patients may show cognitive sequelae that negatively affect functional outcomes. However, although cognitive screening has been recommended in recovered individuals, little is known about which instruments are suitable to this scope by also accounting for clinical status. This study thus aimed at comparatively assessing the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) and the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) in detecting cognitive deficits in post-COVID-19 patients premorbidly/contextually being or not at risk for cognitive deficits (RCD + ; RCD-). Methods Data from N = 100 COVID-19-recovered individuals having been administered both the MMSE and the MoCA were retrospectively analyzed separately for each group. RCD ± classification was performed by taking into consideration both previous and disease-related conditions. Equivalent scores (ESs) were adopted to examine classification performances of the two screeners. Results The two groups were comparable as for most background and cognitive measures. MMSE or MoCA adjusted scores were mostly unrelated to disease-related features. The two screeners yielded similar estimates of below-cut-off performances—RCD + : MMSE: 20%, MoCA: 23.6%; RCD-: MMSE: 2.2%, MoCA: 4.4%. However, agreement rates dropped when also addressing borderline, “low-end” normal, and normal ability categories—with the MoCA attributing lower levels than the MMSE (RCD + : Cohen’s k = .47; RCD-: Cohen’s k = .17). Discussion Although both the MMSE and the MoCA proved to be equally able to detect severe cognitive sequelae of SARS-CoV-2 infection in both RCD + and RCD- patients, the MoCA appeared to be able to reveal sub-clinical defects and more sharply discriminate between different levels of ability.

Introduction: Depression is one of the most disabling neuropsychiatric manifestations of Parkinson’s disease (PD) and requires proper screening and diagnosis because it affects the overall prognosis and quality of life of patients. This study aimed to assess the psychometric and diagnostic properties of the Beck Depression Inventory-II (BDI-II) in an Italian PD cohort. Materials and methods: Fifty consecutive outpatients with PD underwent the Italian version of the BDI-II and other questionnaires to evaluate anxiety and apathetic symptoms. Patients’ caregivers completed the depression/dysphoria domain of the Neuropsychiatric Inventory (NPI-D). We evaluated the internal consistency, convergent and divergent validity, and factorial structure of BDI-II. Sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values, and likelihood ratios were computed using ROC analyses, and an optimal cutoff was defined using the Youden index. Results: The BDI-II proved to be internally consistent (Cronbach’s α = 0.840) and substantially met the bi-factorial structure. Regarding construct validity, the BDI-II was substantially related to anxiety measures, but not to apathy. With the combination of the NPI-D and anxiety score used as the gold standard, the BDI-II overall showed good accuracy (AUC = 0.859) with adequate sensitivity (75%) and specificity (87%). The optimal cutoff point was defined at 14.50. Conclusions: We provide evidence of the psychometric and diagnostic properties of the Italian version of the BDI-II as a screening tool for depression in patients with PD. The BDI-II was found to be reliable and valid for the measurement of depression in patients with PD; therefore, it is available for use in clinical research and practice.