ArticleJournal of Alzheimer's disease reports2023
Normative Data for Single-Letter Controlled Oral Word Association Test in Older White Australians and Americans, African-Americans, and Hispanic/Latinos.
Article in Journal of Alzheimer's disease reports, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Adult lifespan normative data (18-92 years) for executive function tests; the Stroop colour word test, COWAT and Hayling sentence completion test.Journal of neuropsychology · 2026Article
- Telehealth-delivered multimodal mind-body intervention for mild cognitive impairment: a randomized feasibility trial toward scalable dementia prevention.NPJ dementia · 2026Article
- Article
- Changes in Loneliness, Social Isolation, and Social Support: A Gender-Disaggregated Analysis of Their Associations With Dementia and Cognitive Decline in Older Adults.International journal of geriatric psychiatry · 2025Article
- Epigenetic age acceleration and cognitive performance over time in older adults.Alzheimer's & dementia (Amsterdam, Netherlands)Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Background: The Controlled Oral Word Association Test (COWAT) is a commonly used measure of verbal fluency. While a normal decline in verbal fluency occurs in late adulthood, significant impairments may indicate brain injury or diseases such as Alzheimer's disease. Normative data is essential to identify when test performance falls below expected levels based on age, gender, and education level. Objective: This study aimed to establish normative performance data on single-letter COWAT for older community-dwelling adults. Methods: Over 19,000 healthy men and women, without a diagnosis of dementia or a Modified Mini-Mental State Examination score below 77/100, were recruited for the ASPREE trial. Neuropsychological assessments, including the COWAT with letter F, were administered at study entry. Results: Median participant age was 75 years (range 65-98), with 56.5% being women. The majority of participants had 9-11 years of education in Australia and over 12 years in the U.S. The COWAT performance varied across ethno-racial groups and normative data were thus presented separately for 16,335 white Australians, 1,084 white Americans, 896 African-Americans, and 316 Hispanic/Latinos. Women generally outperformed men in the COWAT, except for Hispanic/Latinos. Higher education levels consistently correlated with better COWAT performance across all groups, while the negative association with age was weaker. Conclusions: This study provides comprehensive normative data for the COWAT stratified by ethno-racial groups in Australia and the U.S., considering age, gender, and education level. These norms can serve as reference standards for screening cognitive impairments in older adults in both clinical and research settings.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.