Assessing general cognitive and adaptive abilities in adults with Down syndrome: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Measures of general cognitive and adaptive ability in adults with Down syndrome (DS) used by previous studies vary substantially. This review summarises the different ability measures used previously, focusing on tests of intelligence quotient (IQ) and adaptive behaviour (AB), and where possible examines floor effects and differences between DS subpopulations. We aimed to use information regarding existing measures to provide recommendations for individual researchers and the DS research community. RESULTS: Nineteen studies reporting IQ test data met inclusion for this review, with 17 different IQ tests used. Twelve of these IQ tests were used in only one study while five were used in two different studies. Eleven studies reporting AB test data met inclusion for this review, with seven different AB tests used. The only AB scales to be used by more than one study were the Vineland Adaptive Behaviour Scale (VABS; used by three studies) and the Vineland Adaptive Behavior Scale 2nd Edition (VABS-II; used by two studies). A variety of additional factors were identified which make comparison of test scores between studies problematic, including different score types provided between studies (e.g. raw scores compared to age-equivalent scores) and different participant inclusion criteria (e.g. whether individuals with cognitive decline were excluded). Floor effects were common for IQ tests (particularly for standardised test scores). Data exists to suggest that floor effects may be minimised by the use of raw test scores rather than standardised test scores. Raw scores may, therefore, be particularly useful in longitudinal studies to track change in cognitive ability over time. CONCLUSIONS: Studies assessing general ability in adults with DS are likely to benefit from the use of both IQ and AB scales. The DS research community may benefit from the development of reporting standards for IQ and AB data, and from the sharing of raw study data enabling further in-depth investigation of issues highlighted by this review.

Validating the Cognitive Scale for Down Syndrome (CS-DS) to Detect Longitudinal Cognitive Decline in Adults With Down Syndrome.

Down syndrome (DS) is associated with intellectual disability and an ultra-high risk of developing dementia. Informant ratings are invaluable to assess abilities and related changes in adults with DS, particularly for those with more severe intellectual disabilities and/or cognitive decline. We previously developed the informant rated Cognitive Scale for Down Syndrome (CS-DS) to measure everyday cognitive abilities across memory, executive function, and language domains in adults with DS, finding CS-DS scores are a valid measure of general abilities, and are significantly lower for those with noticeable cognitive decline compared to those without decline. To further test the validity of the CS-DS in detecting changes associated with cognitive decline we collected longitudinal data across two time points, approximately 1.5-2 years apart, for 48 adults with DS aged 36 years and over. CS-DS total scores (78.83 ± 23.85 vs. 73.83 ± 25.35, p = 0.042) and executive function scores (46.40 ± 13.59 vs. 43.54 ± 13.60, p = 0.048) significantly decreased between the two time points, with scores in the memory domain trending towards a significant decrease (22.19 ± 8.03 vs. 20.81 ± 8.63, p = 0.064). Adults with noticeable cognitive decline at follow-up showed a trend to significantly greater change in total scores (7.81 ± 16.41 vs. 3.59 ± 16.79, p = 0.067) and significantly greater change in executive function scores (5.13 ± 9.22 vs. 1.72 ± 9.97, p = 0.028) compared to those without decline. Change in total scores showed significant correlations with change in scores from other informant measures of everyday adaptive abilities and symptoms associated with dementia, and participant assessment of general cognitive abilities (all p < 0.005), while change in memory scores (R 2 = 0.28, p = 0.001) better predicted change in participant cognitive assessment scores than change in executive function (R 2 = 0.15, p = 0.016) or language (R 2 = 0.15, p = 0.018) scores. These results suggest informants may better detect changes in the executive function domain, while change in informant rated memory scores best predicts change in assessed cognitive ability. Alternatively, memory domain scores may be sensitive to changes across both early and late cognitive decline, whereas executive function domain scores are more sensitive to changes associated with later noticeable cognitive decline. Our results provide further support for the validity of the CS-DS to assess everyday cognitive abilities and to detect associated longitudinal changes in individuals with DS.