Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-75dct Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-02T00:44:06.785Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

The assessment of Mild Behavioral Impairment (MBI): Some methodological issues

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 February 2024

Sabela C. Mallo
Affiliation:
University of Santiago de Compostela, Santiago de Compostela, Spain
Byron Creese
Affiliation:
University of Exeter, UK
Eulogio Real-Deus
Affiliation:
University of Santiago de Compostela, Santiago de Compostela, Spain
Zahinoor Ismail
Affiliation:
University of Calgary, Canada
Arturo X Pereiro
Affiliation:
University of Santiago de Compostela, Santiago de Compostela, Spain
Onésimo Juncos-Rabadán
Affiliation:
University of Santiago de Compostela, Santiago de Compostela, Spain
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.
Objective:

The assessment of MBI involves two important issues: 1) to know the underlying structure of the Mild Behavioral Impairment Checklist (MBI-C) a questionnaire designed to evaluates Neuropsychiatric Symptoms (NPS) in pre-dementia states; and 2) to consider self and proxy (i.e., study partner) symptom ratings that may not capture comparable samples. Our objective is to give some answer to these questions: first, to analyze the underlying structure of the MBI-C at baseline and follow-up using Multidimensional Scaling (MDS) and two, to determine how self and proxy ratings and the choice of rating type impact in the results of the MBI-C.

Methods:

To analyze MBI-C structure, 200 Subjective Cognitive Decline and Mild Cognitive Impairment patients from the CompAS longitudinal study completed baseline and follow-up assessments. Two-step bidimensional weighted dichotomous MDS were performed. All items were included in the first step. Items closely associated with each dimension (1 SD above or below the mean) were selected in a second step to obtain the final models solution.

We will also present a review of the literature on the importance of self and proxy MBI-C ratings. We will also present new empirical evidence based on data from over 10,000 cognitively normal.

Results:

Results from baseline and follow-up showed two dimensions: Dimension I (right-left) differentiate high and low emotional activation and Dimension II (top-down) high and low behavioral activation. The combination of both generates 4 quadrants: resistance, restlessness, flattening and desolation. The final models were built considering the most relevant items, with little differences between baseline and follow-up. The good fit of the models, type of two-dimensional solution and group weights were similar in baseline and follow-up.

Regarding our second objective, the results suggest that self and proxy ratings may not capture comparable samples and that the choice of rating type can indeed impact the conclusions drawn from analysis.

Conclusions:

The 4 quadrants identified could be the most useful NPS to determine risk factors for predementia patients. Also, the findings suggest that the way of applying the MBI-C has relevant implications.

Type
Symposia
Copyright
© International Psychogeriatric Association 2024

References

Ismail, Z et al. J. Alzheimers Dis. 2017; 56(3),929938CrossRefGoogle Scholar