Back

The Cambridge Questionnaire for Apathy and Impulsivity Traits (CamQUAIT): a novel assessment tool for frontotemporal lobar degeneration-related syndromes

Lansdall, C. J.; Williams, R. S.; Coyle-Gilchrist, I.; Murley, A. G.; Rouse, M. A.; Bateman, A.; Rowe, J. B.

2024-07-03 geriatric medicine
10.1101/2024.07.01.24309762 medRxiv
Show abstract

State of the ArtApathy and impulsivity are common in syndromes associated with frontotemporal lobar degeneration (FTLD). They are associated with high carer distress and poor patient outcomes. There are limited treatment options and progress has been hindered by a lack of appropriate outcome measures. This study aimed to develop a carer-rated questionnaire oriented to people with syndromes associated with FTLD. MethodologyPrincipal component and Rasch analysis were conducted on carer-, clinician- and patient-reported questionnaires and performance-based tests of behavioural change in the "Picks Disease and Progressive Supranuclear Palsy Prevalence and Incidence" (PiPPIN) study. We identified two key components which informed subsequent item development for a novel scale which we call the Cambridge Questionnaire for Apathy and Impulsivity Traits (CamQUAIT). The resulting scale comprised two subscales assessing "motivation and support" (CamQUAIT-M) and "impulsivity and challenging behaviours" (CamQUAIT-C). An independent sample of 132 carers for people with FTLD-associated syndromes completed the CamQUAIT, along with a battery of existing measures. The CamQUAIT was reduced to 15 items following Rasch analysis. ResultsBoth subscales showed good construct validity as assessed by high Person separation index (CamQUAIT-M=0.9; CamQUAIT-C=0.7) and Cronbachs alpha (CamQUAIT-M=0.9; CamQUAIT-C=0.8). The subscales correlated moderately with each other (r=0.376, p<0.001), and with existing measures of behavioural change. ConclusionThe CamQUAIT is a targeted measurement tool to assess apathy, impulsivity, and related behavioural change in the context of FTLD-related syndromes. The scale demonstrates good measurement properties and is sensitive to group differences, providing a suitable outcome measure to evaluate novel symptomatic treatments.

Matching journals

The top 5 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
BMC Neurology
12 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
18.7%
2
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 15%
12.4%
3
BMC Geriatrics
15 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
8.5%
4
Biology Methods and Protocols
53 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
7.2%
5
Journal of Neurology
26 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
4.9%
50% of probability mass above
6
Alzheimer's & Dementia
143 papers in training set
Top 1%
4.3%
7
Frontiers in Neurology
91 papers in training set
Top 2%
3.6%
8
Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience
67 papers in training set
Top 1.0%
3.6%
9
Journal of Alzheimer's Disease
43 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
3.1%
10
Journal of the American Medical Directors Association
13 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.9%
11
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 53%
1.9%
12
Frontiers in Physiology
93 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.5%
13
Parkinsonism & Related Disorders
21 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
1.5%
14
Frontiers in Public Health
140 papers in training set
Top 6%
1.3%
15
BMJ Open
554 papers in training set
Top 11%
1.2%
16
Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases
18 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
1.2%
17
Movement Disorders
62 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
1.2%
18
Translational Psychiatry
219 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.1%
19
Frontiers in Medicine
113 papers in training set
Top 5%
1.1%
20
Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery & Psychiatry
29 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.0%
21
Cureus
67 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.0%
22
Age and Ageing
27 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
1.0%
23
Journal of Parkinson's Disease
13 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
0.9%
24
Journal of Alzheimer’s Disease
39 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.8%
25
GeroScience
97 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.7%
26
eClinicalMedicine
55 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.6%
27
Neurobiology of Disease
134 papers in training set
Top 5%
0.6%
28
Psychiatry Research
35 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.5%
29
Brain Communications
147 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.5%