ArticleAlzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association2025
Addressing language challenges in bilingual neuropsychological assessments at the South Texas Alzheimer's Disease Research Center (ADRC).
Article in Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Deconstructing bilingualism and its sociocultural determinants in cognitive aging and Alzheimer's disease and related dementias.Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association · 2026Review
- Addressing language challenges in bilingual neuropsychological assessments at the South Texas Alzheimer's Disease Research Center (ADRC).Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
25 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionNeuropsychological assessment of bilingual (English/Spanish) individuals presents challenges that can impact test validity. Language proficiency influences cognitive performance, yet clear guidelines for determining the appropriate test language are lacking. We describe our experiences at the South Texas Alzheimer's Disease Research Center (STAC) in addressing these challenges within the context of National Alzheimer's Coordinating Center (NACC) Uniform Data Set (UDS) assessments and broader Alzheimer's Disease Research Center (ADRC) protocols. We outline steps toward a structured language assessment approach.
methodsWe implemented a process to assess language proficiency, integrating self-reported and objective measures, including the language dominance index (LDI). Case examples illustrate the impact of language on cognitive testing.
resultsChallenges included discrepancies between self-reported and objective language proficiency, language switching during assessments, and resistance to testing in the dominant language. DISCUSSION: Language assessment improves test validity and research consistency. Future efforts should refine bilingual assessment methods and establish standardized protocols. HIGHLIGHTS: Systematic test language selection may improve accuracy in bilingual assessments. Discrepancies in reported versus objective language proficiency challenge bilingual assessments. Language evaluation guidelines are needed to improve test validity and data consistency.
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.