This Article  • Full text PDF  • Reply to article  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in this journal  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

Keith R. Edwards, MD; Charles M. Poser, MD; Susan B. Filskov, PhD; Janis M. Peyser, PhD
Section of Medical Psychology Department of Psychiatry Medical Center Hospital of Vermont Burlington, VT 05401

Arch Neurol. 1981;38(5):325.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text PDF and any section headings.

In Reply.—

We are well aware of the relationship between age and scores on the Category Test, and we refer Dr Binder to our discussion of this in the "Results" section of the report. If we had relied on a mean Category Test score alone in making statements about our subject population, Dr Binder's point would carry even more weight; however, the data were examined in terms of the number of normal vs impaired subjects. To do this, a judgment of "impaired" or "unimpaired" was made for each subject using the outlined criteria rather than the standard cut-off score. This is exactly the determination that clinicians must make daily, for any given patient. For example, there can be little disagreement that a 54-year-old subject with 12 years of education and an estimated IQ of 94 who makes 104 errors on the Category Test is impaired beyond anything attributable to normal aging.

We . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?