Abstract
Background
Deficits of executive functioning (EF) are frequently found in neurological disorders. The Frontal Assessment Battery (FAB) is one of the most widespread and psychometrically robust EF screeners in clinical settings. However, in Italy, FAB norms date back to 15 years ago; moreover, its validity against “EF-loaded” global cognitive screeners (e.g., the Montreal Cognitive Assessment, MoCA) has yet to be tested. This study thus aimed at (a) providing updated normative data for the Italian FAB and (b) assessing its convergent validity with the MoCA.
Methods
Four-hundred and seventy-five healthy Italian native speakers (306 females, 169 males; mean age: 61.08 ± 15.1; mean education: 11.67 ± 4.57) were administered by the MoCA and the FAB. FAB items were divided into three subscales: FAB-1 (linguistically mediated EF), FAB-2 (planning), and FAB-3 (inhibition). Regression-based norms were derived (equivalent scores) for all FAB measures.
Results
Age and education were predictive of all FAB measures, whereas no gender differences were detected. The FAB and its sub-scales were related to MoCA measures—the strongest associations being found with MoCA total and MoCA-EF scores. FAB sub-scales were both internally related and associated with FAB total scores.
Discussion
The FAB proved to have convergent validity with both global cognitive and EF measures in healthy individuals. The present study provides updated normative data for the FAB and its sub-scales in an Italian population sample, and thus supports an adaptive usage of this EF screener.
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
Introduction
Executive functioning (EF) comprises a multifaceted set of frontally mediated, noninstrumental cognitive processes that control instrumental domains and behavior [1]. Executive disorders are thus frequently found in a variety of neurological conditions of different etiologies that affect cortical/subcortical frontal structures [2].
Although second-level specific psychometric tests are to be preferred when assessing EF [3], screening instruments for executive deficits are often useful in clinical settings, such as providing with an optimal trade-off between informativity and both sensitivity and a rapid administration [4].
The Frontal Assessment Battery (FAB) [5] is an EF screener that requires 5–10’ to administer and consists of 6 tasks assessing different EF facets: (1) concept formation and abstract reasoning (similarities); (2) mental flexibility (phonemic verbal fluency); (3) motor programming (Luria motor sequences); (4) sensitivity to interference (conflicting instructions); (5) inhibitory control (go-no-go); (6) environmental autonomy (prehension behavior) [5, 6].
The FAB is one of the most widely used EF screeners worldwide; its psychometric properties, clinical usability, and neural correlates have been thoroughly investigated [7].
In Italy, the FAB has been adapted and normed, as well as validated in both healthy and clinical populations [6, 8]. However, current FAB Italian normative data date back to more than 15 years ago and sociodemographic changes require norms updating [9]. Moreover, to the best of the authors’ knowledge, the FAB has been only validated against “non-executive” screeners in Italy [6]—e.g., the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) [10]—whereas its association with “EF-loaded” screening measures, e.g., the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) [11], has yet to be explored. In addition, FAB normative studies do not provide with norms for its subtests, despite this being an increasingly widespread approach for cognitive screeners in Italy [12, 13], as it allows greater flexibility for clinicians when using these instruments.
Accordingly, the two aims of the present study are (1) providing updated normative data for both FAB total and sub-test scales in a large Italian representative population sample and (2) validating the FAB and its subscales against the MoCA.
Subjects and methods
Participants
The sample consisted of N = 475 healthy Italian native speakers from different provinces of Northern Italy (Table 1). Participants had no history of neurological, psychiatric, or severe general medical conditions (i.e. severe internal and metabolic morbidities or systemic/organ failures). Studies that data come from were approved by the Research Evaluation Committee of the Department of Psychology of University of Milano-Bicocca on behalf of the Ethical Committee of the same university. Participants provided informed consent to participation and signed a data treatment disclaimer research purposes.
Materials
Global cognition was assessed via the MoCA [12, 14], which encompasses subtests evaluating EF (MoCA-EF), attention (MoCA-A), language (MoCA-L), memory (MoCA-M), visuospatial functions (MoCA-VS), and orientation (MoCA-O). Supplementary Table 1 provides the protocol for the current FAB. FAB items (N = 6) were grouped into 3 subscales: FAB-1 comprising the first two items (similarities and phonemic verbal fluency, linguistically mediated EF); FAB-2, comprising the second two-item set (Luria motor sequences and conflicting instructions, planning); FAB-3, comprising the last two items (go-no-go and prehension behavior, inhibition). All participants were administered the MoCA first and then the FAB.
Statistical analyses
According to previous normative studies [15, 16], the minimum sample size was set at N = 287 by means of a power analysis (α = 0.05; 1-β = 0.9; f2 = 0.05) for multiple linear regression (dfnumerator = 3) analyses [17] via the R 3.6.3 package pwr [18].
Normality assumptions on both background and cognitive raw variables were checked by evaluating skewness and kurtosis values (judged as abnormal if ≥|1| and |3|, respectively) [19].
Associations of interest between quantitative variables were assessed by means of either Pearson’s or Spearman’s techniques. When judged as relevant, Bonferroni correction for multiple comparisons was applied.
According to the equivalent scores (ES) method [20, 21], raw scores (RSs) were adjusted for significant intervening background predictors (or their transforms) via regression-based equations. The cutoff was identified by computing outer and inner tolerance limits (oTL; iTL). Adjusted scores (ASs) were then standardized into a 5-level quasi-continuous scale: ES = 0 (ASs ≤ oTL; “abnormal”); ES = 4 (ASs > Mdn; “normal”); ES = 1, 2, and 3 (oTL < ASs ≤ Mdn; respectively, “borderline,” “low-end normal,” “normal”).
Analyses were performed via SPSS 27 [22] and R 3.6.3 [23]. Regression studies, as well as computations of both TLs and ES thresholds, were implemented according to guidelines and software solutions described in [24].
Results
Background and cognitive scores are summarized in Table 2.
The vast majority of FAB scales were related to MoCA measures (Table 3): the strongest associations were found with MoCA-EF and total scores. FAB subtest scores were all associated with each other (0.21 ≤ rs(475) ≤ 0.24; p < 0.001), as well as with FAB total scores (FAB-1: rs(475) = 0.65; FAB-2: rs(475) = 0.63; FAB-3: rs(475) = 0.7).
Age was negatively related to FAB-1 (rs(475) = − 0.3; p < 0.001), − 2 (rs(475) = − 0.36; p < 0.001), − 3 (rs(475) = − 0.3; p < 0.001) and total (rs(475) = − 0.44; p < 0.001) scores, whereas a positive association with education was detected: FAB-1 (rs(475) = 0.35; p < 0.001), FAB-2 (rs(475) = 0.24; p < 0.001), FAB-3 (rs(475) = 0.31; p < 0.001), and total (rs(475) = 0.42; p < 0.001). No sex differences were found: FAB-1 (t(473) = − 0.92; p = 0.357), FAB-2 (t(473) = 0.44; p = 0.66), FAB-3 (t(385.3) = 1.5; p = 0.25), and total (t(473) = 0.4; p = 0.689).
When simultaneously tested, age and education revealed to be predictive of FAB both total and subtest scores (age: − 0.17 ≤ β ≤ − 0.34; p ≤ 0.001; education: |0.15|≤ β ≤|0.33|; p ≤ 0.001). Cubic age and logarithmic education proved to be the most significant predictors of all FAB scales, with the exception of FAB-2 and FAB-3 that were best predicted by reciprocal education and quadratic age, respectively (Tables 4 and 5).
Selected correction factors and adjustment equations for FAB total and subtest RSs are displayed in Tables 4 and 5, respectively. TLs and ESs classifications for all FAB ASs are reported in Table 6.
Discussion
The present work provides Italian practitioners with updated normative data for the FAB and its subtests. These norms cover a wider age and education range and are drawn from a larger sample size (N = 475) than those of previous normative studies (N = 236 [8] and N = 364 [6]). Moreover, norms for FAB subscales are provided—this representing a previously unreported feature that supports an adaptive usage of the screener.
This study overall replicates previous findings with respect to the range of FAB scores’ predictors in the Italian population: the performance increases with higher educational attainment and decreases with aging, while no sex differences are detected[6, 8]. It has nonetheless to be noted that the cutoff reported here (12.03), despite being similar to that derived by Iavarone et al. [8] (11.54), is more conservative than Appollonio et al.’s [6] (13.5). This aspect might reflect sociodemographic changes that have occurred in the last two decades in northern Italian population.
To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this contribution is the first showing convergent validity between the FAB (and its sub-scales) and an “EF-loaded” cognitive screener—i.e., the MoCA—in Italian healthy individuals. The present results also support the notion of the MoCA being a screening instrument sensitive to EF deficits, when compared to other screeners, such as the MMSE [25].
Data Availability
Data collected and analyzed during the present study are available on the Open Science Framework (OSF) repository (https://osf.io/4xypv/).
Change history
22 April 2022
A Correction to this paper has been published: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10072-022-06087-8
24 July 2022
A Correction to this paper has been published: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10072-022-06295-2
References
Jurado MB, Rosselli M (2007) The elusive nature of executive functions: a review of our current understanding. Neuropsychol Rev 17:213–233
Godefroy O, Martinaud O, Narme P, Joseph PA, Mosca C, Lhommée E, Meulemans T, Czernecki V, Bertola C, Labauge P, Verny M (2018) Dysexecutive disorders and their diagnosis: a position paper. Cortex 109:322–335
Chan RC, Shum D, Toulopoulou T, Chen EY (2008) Assessment of executive functions: review of instruments and identification of critical issues. Arch Clin Neuropsychol 23:201–216
Moreira HS, Costa AS, Castro SL, Lima CF, Vicente SG (2017) Assessing executive dysfunction in neurodegenerative disorders: a critical review of brief neuropsychological tools. Front Aging Neurosci 9:369
Dubois B, Slachevsky A, Litvan I, Pillon BFAB (2000) The FAB: a frontal assessment battery at bedside. Neurology 55:1621–1626
Appollonio I, Leone M, Isella V, Piamarta F, Consoli T, Villa ML, Forapani E, Russo A, Nichelli P (2005) The Frontal Assessment Battery (FAB): normative values in an Italian population sample. Neurol Sci 26:108–116
Hurtado-Pomares M, Carmen Terol-Cantero M, Sánchez-Pérez A, Peral-Gómez P, Valera-Gran D, Navarrete-Muñoz EM (2018) The frontal assessment battery in clinical practice: a systematic review. Int J Geriatr Psychiatry 33:237–251
Iavarone A, Ronga B, Pellegrino L, Loré E, Vitaliano S, Galeone F, Carlomagno S (2004) The Frontal Assessment Battery (FAB): normative data from an Italian sample and performances of patients with Alzheimer’s disease and frontotemporal dementia. Funct Neurol 19:191–195
Siciliano M, Chiorri C, Battini V, Sant’Elia V, Altieri M, Trojano L, Santangelo G (2019) Regression-based normative data and equivalent scores for Trail Making Test (TMT): an updated Italian normative study. Neurol Sci 40:469–477
Folstein MF, Folstein SE, McHugh PR (1975) “Mini-mental state”: a practical method for grading the cognitive state of patients for the clinician. J Psychiatr Res 12:189–198
Nasreddine ZS, Phillips NA, Bédirian V, Charbonneau S, Whitehead V, Collin I, Cummings JL, Chertkow H (2005) The Montreal Cognitive Assessment, MoCA: a brief screening tool for mild cognitive impairment. J Am Geriatr Soc 53:695–699
Santangelo G, Siciliano M, Pedone R, Vitale C, Falco F, Bisogno R, Siano P, Barone P, Grossi D, Santangelo F, Trojano L (2015) Normative data for the Montreal Cognitive Assessment in an Italian population sample. Neurol Sci 36:585–591
Siciliano M, Raimo S, Tufano D, Basile G, Grossi D, Santangelo F, Trojano L, Santangelo G (2016) The Addenbrooke’s Cognitive Examination Revised (ACE-R) and its sub-scores: normative values in an Italian population sample. Neurol Sci 37:385–392
Conti S, Bonazzi S, Laiacona M, Masina M, Coralli MV (2015) Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA)-Italian version: regression based norms and equivalent scores. Neurol Sci 36:209–214
Brugnolo A, De Carli F, Accardo J, Amore M, Bosia LE, Bruzzaniti C, Cappa SF, Cocito L, Colazzo G, Ferrara M, Ghio L (2016) An updated Italian normative dataset for the Stroop color word test (SCWT). Neurol Sci 37:365–372
Tremolizzo L, Lizio A, Santangelo G, Diamanti S, Lunetta C, Gerardi F, Messina S, La Foresta S, Riva N, Falzone Y, Filippi M, Woolley SC, Sansone V, Siciliano M, Ferrarese C, Appollonio I, ALS-CBS Italian Study Group (2020) ALS Cognitive Behavioral Screen (ALS-CBS): normative values for the Italian population and clinical usability. Neurol Sci 41:835–841
Rothstein HR, Borenstein M, Cohen J, Pollack S (1990) Statistical power analysis for multiple regression/correlation: a computer program. Educ Psychol Measur 50:819–830
Champely S (2020) pwr: Basic functions for power analysis (R package version 1.3–0) [Computer software]. The Comprehensive R Archive Network. Available from https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=pwr. Accessed 20 Feb 2020
Kim HY (2013) Statistical notes for clinical researchers: assessing normal distribution (2) using skewness and kurtosis. Restor Dent Endod 38:52–54
Capitani E, Laiacona M (2017) Outer and inner tolerance limits: their usefulness for the construction of norms and the standardization of neuropsychological tests. Clin Neuropsychol 31:1219–1230
Spinnler H, Tognoni G (1987) Standardizzazione e taratura italiana di test neuropsicologici. Ital J Neurol Sci 6:1–120
IBM Corp (2021) IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows, Version 27.0. Armonk: IBM Corp
R Core Team (2019) R: A Language and environment for statistical computing. (Version 3.6.3) [Computer software]. Retrieved from https://cran.r-project.org. Accessed 20 Feb 2020
Aiello EN, Depaoli EG (2021) Norms and standardizations in neuropsychology via equivalent scores: software solutions and practical guides. Neurol Sci. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10072-021-05374-0
Siqueira GS, Hagemann PDM, Coelho DDS, Santos FHD, Bertolucci PH (2019) Can MoCA and MMSE be interchangeable cognitive screening tools? A systematic review. Gerontologist 59:e743–e763
Funding
Open access funding provided by Università degli Studi di Milano - Bicocca within the CRUI-CARE Agreement.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Ethics approval
This study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki. Participants provided their informed consent to participation.
Conflicts of interests
The authors declare no competing interests.
Additional information
Publisher's note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Supplementary Information
Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.
Supplementary Information
Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.
ESM1
(PDF 433 kb)
Rights and permissions
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
About this article
Cite this article
Aiello, E.N., Esposito, A., Gramegna, C. et al. The Frontal Assessment Battery (FAB) and its sub-scales: validation and updated normative data in an Italian population sample. Neurol Sci 43, 979–984 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10072-021-05392-y
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10072-021-05392-y