Measuring longitudinal cognition: Individual tests versus composites

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Longitudinal cohort studies of cognitive aging must confront several sources of within-person variability in scores. In this article, we compare several neuropsychological measures in terms of longitudinal error variance and relationships with biomarker-assessed brain amyloidosis (Aβ). METHODS: Analyses used data from the Wisconsin Registry for Alzheimer's Prevention. We quantified within-person longitudinal variability and age-related trajectories for several global and domain-specific composites and their constituent scores. For a subset with cerebrospinal fluid or amyloid positron emission tomography measures, we examined how Aβ modified cognitive trajectories. RESULTS: Global and theoretically derived composites exhibited lower intraindividual variability and stronger age × Aβ interactions than did empirically derived composites or raw scores from single tests. For example, the theoretical executive function outperformed other executive function scores on both metrics. DISCUSSION: These results reinforce the need for careful selection of cognitive outcomes in study design, and support the emerging consensus favoring composites over single-test measures.