-
Views
-
Cite
Cite
Iverson G, Connors E, Marsh J, Terry D, A-242 Examining Normative Reference Values and Item-Level Symptom Endorsement for the Neuro-QoLTM v2.0 Cognitive Function-Short Form, Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology, Volume 35, Issue 6, September 2020, Page 1037, https://doi.org/10.1093/arclin/acaa068.242
Close - Share Icon Share
Abstract
We examined the normative reference values, item-level symptom endorsement, internal consistency reliability, and the base rates of symptoms endorsed for the Neuro-QoLTM v2.0 Cognitive Function-Short Form.
The Neuro-QoLTM v2.0 Cognitive Function-Short Form is a fixed 8-item scale that measures subjective cognitive functioning. Raw scores range from 8–40, with higher scores indicating less cognitive concerns. Adults from the general US population completed the scale. The sample was stratified by gender and health status. Individuals were included in the healthy subgroup if they reported no personal history of mental health, neurological, or sleep disorders and rated their overall health, functioning, and quality of life as “good” or better.
A normative sample of 1,009 adults completed this scale and their mean score was 32.60 (SD = 6.89). The healthy subgroup (n = 475) had a higher mean, suggesting less perceived cognitive difficulties (M = 35.12, SD = 5.57). This pattern was consistent for men (all men, M = 31.26, SD = 7.10; healthy men, M = 33.86, SD = 5.95) and women (all women, M = 33.89, SD = 6.43; healthy women, M = 36.42, SD = 4.85). The base rates of those who reported zero cognitive symptoms were consistently higher among the healthy samples (healthy men = 79.2%; all men = 63.9%; healthy women = 90.2%; all women = 80.0%). Internal consistency was measured using Cronbach’s alpha and ranged from 0.87 to 0.94 across groups.
The Neuro-QoLTM v2.0 Cognitive Function-Short Form is a brief, efficient, and reliable measure of perceived cognitive difficulties. The subgroup normative reference values and base rate analyses of individual symptom endorsement presented herein can be used by clinicians and researchers for a more refined interpretation of the scale.
