Results Flashcards
As expected, scores on many of the measures of working memory, speech and language, and praxis differed significantly in ?
in lvPPA and nfvPPA groups relative to healthy controls
Only scores on tests of naming, comprehension, accuracy in reading aloud, and the percentage of nouns produced in narrative production and spelling differed between the
SD group and healthy controls, in keeping with their semantic disorder.
Scores on tests of naming, auditory sentence comprehension, spelling, several tests of repetition and auditory-visual working memory differed between
AD and controls
Patients in all groups showed problems in?
Which scores did not differentiate the groups? But there were?
naming and naming scores alone did not differentiate the groups.
But there were qualitative differences.
Which patient group named a higher proportion of actions relative to objects than all other patient groups?
SD patient.
SD group made more ? Than?
More semantic errors than nfvPPA patients.
The disproportionately poor naming of nouns was reasonably sensitive (87.5%) and specific (86.8%) to?
SD.
Which group made more phonological errors on naming tests than SD patients?
NfvPPA
Agrammatism is a core feature ?
in nfvPPA
yet, scores on only a subset of sentence processing tasks were
significantly worse in nfvPPA compared to the other patient groups.
The Manchester sentence ordering test yielded the highest level of
Significance.
Ordering five words according to a dictated sentence (dictation condition), and reading aloud of an ordered sentence (reading condition), were poorer in
nfvPPA comprared to all other patient groups.
By contrast, on the standard, ‘order’ condition, in which patients were required to arrange sets of five words to form a sentence, nfvPPA scores were poorer than in
lvPPA but not SD or AD.
The reading condition had the highest
sensitivity (91.7%) but the lowest specificity (78.1%
NfvPPA patients performed more
poorly than other groups on several measures of speech derived from narrative production
These include a shorter mean length of utterance and more phonemic errors compared to all other groups, fewer dependent clauses per utterance compared to lvPPA and a lower percentage of well-formed sentences than SD. Scores on a test of comprehension of complex syntax did not differ significantly between the patient groups.
Orofacial praxis differentiated nfvPPA from other patient groups, with overall scores on the Manchester orofacial praxis screen showing
good specificity (77.1%), and sensitivity (100.0%).
Orofacial actions and pantomimes had the ?
highest specificity (both 100.0%) but lower sensitivity (58.3% and 41.7% respectively).
unsurprisingly, production of repetitive and elongated speech sounds, that is, a measure of AOS, showed
the best balance of specificity and sensitivity (91.7% and 91.4% respectively).
Patients with nfvPPA, lvPPA, and AD performed
similarly on tests of working memory, whereas SD patients showed superior performance.
NfvPPA patients performed worse than
SD on digit span forwards and reverse conditions and on the sentence repetition test, whereas lvPPA patients performed worse than SD patients on all sections of the Brown– Peterson test.
AD patients scored
lower on the reverse digit span, immediate Brown– Peterson test, and the visual patterns test relative to SD patients
As working memory tests were expected to be useful in
differentiating lvPPA from other groups, the sensitivity and specificity of these measures for lvPPA were calculated.
The total score on the Brown–Peterson test showed the highest
sensitivity for lvPPA (100.0%) but considerably lower specificity (50.0%).
What made the specificity to increase to 65%?
When multidomain AD patients were excluded from the analysis
The only tests to reach over 70.0% specificity for lvPPA were ?
the visual array comparison location test and the Manchester immediate word repetition test (77.4% and 76.5% respectively), but the sensitivities were very low (25.0% and 38.4%).
