==== Front Dement Neuropsychol dn Dementia & Neuropsychologia 1980-5764 1980-5764 Associação de Neurologia Cognitiva e do Comportamento 1980-57642020dn14-040004 10.1590/1980-57642020dn14-040004 Original Article Normative data for middle-aged Brazilians in the Mattis Dementia Rating Scale DADOS NORMATIVOS PARA BRASILEIROS DE MEIA-IDADE NA ESCALA DE AVALIAÇÃO DE DEMÊNCIA DE MATTIS http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2210-1016Carvalho Guilherme Almeida 1 2 http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4786-6990Caramelli Paulo 2 3 1 Rede Sarah de Hospitais de Reabilitação – Belo Horizonte, MG, Brazil. 2 Programa de Pós-Graduação em Ciências Aplicadas à Saúde do Adulto, Faculdade de Medicina, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais – Belo Horizonte, MG, Brazil. 3 Grupo de Pesquisa em Neurologia Cognitiva e do Comportamento, Departamento de Clínica Médica, Faculdade de Medicina, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais – Belo Horizonte, MG, Brazil. Guilherme Almeida Carvalho. Rede Sarah de Hospitais de Reabilitação – Avenida Amazonas, 5953 – Gameleira – 30510-000 Belo Horizonte MG – Brazil. E-mail: guilhermegoog@gmail.comDisclosure: The authors report no conflicts of interest. Authors’ contributions. GAC: conceptualization, writing — original draft, and writing — review & editing. PC: conceptualization, writing — original draft, and writing — review & editing. 12 2020 12 2020 14 4 350 357 24 6 2019 17 9 2020 This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution LicenseABSTRACT. Despite the advances in the diagnosis of dementia, neuropsychological assessment remains an important tool. The Mattis Dementia Rating Scale (DRS) was designed to evaluate people with suspected dementia and allows for the analysis of different cognitive domains. Considering the numerous cases of early-onset dementia, specific reference standards aimed at the middle-aged population are necessary. Objective: To provide normative data for the middle-aged Brazilian population in DRS and to investigate the influence of education level, age, sex, and intelligence quotient (IQ) on the results. Methods: Overall, 120 healthcare professionals and caregivers from a hospital, who were healthy, aged between 45 and 64 years, and had at least four years of formal education, were included in the study. They were equally divided into six groups. In each age group (45–54 and 55–64 years), there were three educational levels: 4–7, 8–11, and 12 or more (12+) years of formal education. The results are presented as mean values, standard deviations, and percentiles. Comparisons between groups were carried out for age, sex, and education level. Age, years of formal education, and IQ were also analyzed as continuous variables by Spearman's correlation. Results: Concerning education level, the comparison between groups showed differences in the results for the total scale and subscales, except for the Construction subscale. No differences were found for age and sex. Correlations observed for years of formal education and IQ were similar. No correlation was found for age. Conclusions: The present study contributes to the evaluation of dementia concerning people younger than 65 years of age and reinforces the importance of education in the interpretation of the scores. RESUMO. Apesar dos avanços no diagnóstico de demência, a avaliação neuropsicológica continua sendo uma importante ferramenta. A Escala de Avaliação de Demência de Mattis (Mattis Dementia Rating Scale — DRS) foi projetada para avaliar pessoas com suspeita de demência e permite a análise de diferentes domínios cognitivos. Dados os numerosos casos de demência com início precoce, são necessárias normas específicas para a população de meia-idade. Objetivo: Fornecer dados normativos para a população brasileira de meia-idade na escala Mattis e investigar a influência da escolaridade, idade, sexo e quociente de inteligência (QI) nos resultados. Métodos: 120 funcionários e cuidadores saudáveis de um hospital, com idade entre 45 e 64 anos e com pelo menos quatro anos de escolaridade foram incluídos no estudo, os quais foram divididos igualmente em seis grupos. Havia três níveis educacionais para cada faixa etária (45–54 e 55–64 anos): 4 a 7 anos de estudo (4–7), 8 a 11 (8–11) e 12 anos ou mais (12+). Os resultados são apresentados como valores médios, desvios padrão e percentis. Foram realizadas comparações entre os grupos de acordo com idade, sexo e escolaridade. Idade, anos de estudo e QI foram também analisados como variáveis contínuas através da correlação de Spearman. Resultados: Para a educação, a comparação entre os grupos mostrou diferenças nos resultados da escala total e subescalas, exceto na subescala Construção. Não foram identificadas diferenças para idade e sexo. As correlações observadas para anos de estudo e QI foram semelhantes. Nenhuma correlação foi encontrada para idade. Conclusão: O presente estudo contribui para a avaliação da demência em indivíduos com menos de 65 anos e reforça a importância de considerar o nível educacional na interpretação dos escores. Keywords: mental status and dementia testseducationBrazilreference standardsmiddle agedPalavras-chave: testes de estado mental e demênciaeducaçãoBrasilpadrões de referênciapessoas de meia-idade ==== Body INTRODUCTION Despite the many advances in the diagnosis of dementia, neuropsychological assessment remains an essential tool in this process. 1 Some of the most popular neuropsychological test batteries used to detect dementia, such as the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) and the Mini-Cog, are brief. 2 They are useful for dementia screening, but have limitations in the adequate characterization of neuropsychological profiles and dementia staging. Conversely, a comprehensive neuropsychological assessment requires many sessions, and some tasks can be difficult for moderate or severe stages of cognitive impairment. The Mattis Dementia Rating Scale (DRS) is a neuropsychological test battery designed for people with known or suspected dementia. 3 The tasks are suitable for people in different dementia stages, allowing for the analysis of specific cognitive domains and the follow-up of cognitive functioning over time. The evaluation of patients with dementia carried out with DRS usually lasts 30 to 45 minutes. The total scale is divided into five subscales: Attention (ATT), Initiation/Perseveration (I/P), Construction (CONST), Conceptualization (CONCEPT), and Memory (MEM). This division enables the identification of different cognitive profiles in distinct forms of dementia, thus contributing to a differential diagnosis. When different dementing disorders were compared, studies showed comparable total scores, but differences on subscales. Patients with Alzheimer's disease (AD) score worse on the MEM subscale than patients with other disorders such as frontotemporal dementia, 4 vascular dementia, 5 Huntington's disease, or progressive supranuclear palsy. 6 On the other hand, patients with AD had better performance on I/P. In Brazil, Porto et al. 7 , 8 and Foss et al. 9 , 10 conducted studies to adapt the scale and define standards for the Brazilian population. These studies confirm international findings regarding the influence of age and education on the results. Strauss et al. recommend that normative data be classified according to age and education level. 3 Most cases of dementia begin after the age of 65. 11 However, some cases present an early onset, indicating that normative data for this population are necessary. In a population-based study aiming to investigate the prevalence of dementia in a small Brazilian city, César found a prevalence of 5.3% among individuals aged 60 to 64 years, which is five times higher than in other regions worldwide. The author stated that this finding is probably related to low educational levels. 12 In the normative study conducted by Foss et al. on 502 Brazilians, there were fewer participants under the age of 60. Thus, the authors recommended additional studies with more participants in the age group of 50–60 years. 10 The present study aimed to provide normative data for individuals aged 45 to 64 years and to investigate the influence of education level, age, sex, and intelligence quotient (IQ) on results of the DRS. METHODS A more detailed description of the methods can be found on a previous study. 13 Participants The sample consisted of 120 healthcare professionals and caregivers from a hospital, who were cognitively-healthy, aged between 45 and 64 years, had at least four years of formal education, and were randomly selected. They were equally divided into six groups according to age and education level. In each age group (45–54 and 55–64 years), there were three education levels: 4–7, 8–11, and 12 or more (12+) years of formal education. Individuals with neurological and psychiatric disorders whose symptoms could cause cognitive impairment at the time of the tests were excluded as well as subjects with hearing or visual impairment. Moreover, individuals who reported the use of psychoactive drugs within three weeks prior to the administration of the tests were excluded. Subjects who reported alcohol dependence or who were using illicit drugs were also excluded. Setting The study was approved by the Ethics Committees of Hospital Sarah and Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais. The first author, who has considerable experience with neuropsychological examination, collected data in an appropriate room at Hospital Sarah in Belo Horizonte (state of Minas Gerais), Brazil, between May 2015 and October 2016. Instruments The MMSE was used as a study entry criterion. Individuals below the established education-adjusted cutoff points were excluded (24 for 4–7 years of formal education, and 26 for 8 or more years). 14 , 15 Modules A, J, and O of the Mini-International Neuropsychiatric Interview (MINI) were also performed to investigate frequent psychiatric disorders. 16 , 17 Individuals who met the criteria for major depressive disorder, generalized anxiety disorder, or alcohol dependence, according to MINI, were excluded from the study. Participants also completed the two-subtest form of the Wechsler Abbreviated Scale of Intelligence (WASI) to determine their IQ. 18 DRS has a total score of 144, which is divided among the five subscales, namely: 37 points related to the ATT subscale; 37, to I/P; six, to CONST; 39, to CONCEPT; and 25, to MEM. 7 Table 1 shows a brief description of the subtests in the subscales. 3 , 7 Table 1 Brief description of the Mattis Dementia Rating Scale subtests Subscale Subtests Maximum points Attention Digit span 37 Commands Imitation Letter A counting (two tasks) Word list reading Visual matching Initiation/ Perseveration Verbal fluency tests (supermarket products and body parts) 37 Sound repetition Alternating movements Graphomotor design Construction Copying designs 6 Conceptualization Similarities 39 Inductive reasoning Differences Similarities – Multiple choice Memory Orientation 25 Verbal recall – reading and sentence generated by the examinee Verbal recognition (word list reading from the Attention subscale) Visual recognition (visual matching from the Attention subscale) Total score 144 Sources: Scoring Booklet* and Strauss et al. 3 * The scoring booklet of the Brazilian adaptation was kindly provided by the Department of Neurology - Hospital das Clínicas da Faculdade de Medicina da Universidade de São Paulo. 7 Procedures In the first session, after signing the informed consent form, the participants attended an interview and completed the MMSE and the MINI. In a second session, the application of the WASI and DRS was carried out. In the interview, age, years of formal education, history of possible neurological and psychiatric illnesses, health conditions, medications in use, and possible history of consumption of alcoholic beverages and drug use were verified. Statistical analysis The Shapiro-Wilk test was used to verify the hypothesis of normal distribution. Nonparametric tests were the most appropriate for the analyses. The Kruskal-Wallis test (K-W) was chosen to compare the groups according to education level, and the Mann-Whitney (M-W) test was used forpost hoc analyses with a Bonferroni correction for p-values. The Mann-Whitney test was used in paired comparisons to analyze sex and age. Age, years of formal education, and IQ were also analyzed as continuous variables with Spearman's correlation (rs). The classification suggested by Siqueira and Tibúrcio was followed to interpret the correlations: 0–0.4, weak; 0.4–0.7, moderate; and 0.7–1.0, strong. 19 All analyses were performed using theStatistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) software, version 20.0. The considered level of significance was p<0.05. In cases in which the Bonferroni correction was performed, p<0.017 was considered significant. RESULTS Overall, 153 individuals were invited to participate in the study. There were 13 nonrespondents and 18 exclusions: 12 due to the use of medications with potential negative cognitive effects; one due to neurological disease; one for being outside the age group; and four for failing to meet the diagnostic criteria of the MINI interview. Of the 122 participants included, two withdrew during the second stage, in which the WASI and DRS were applied. Table 2 shows the sociodemographic characteristics of the participants. Results of DRS are presented as mean values, standard deviations, and percentiles (Table 3). Considering the non-normal frequency distribution, the use of percentiles (P) was recommended. Table 2 Sociodemographic characteristics of the participants Groups (years of formal education/age) Age (years)a Years of formal education 1 Sexb IQa n 4–7/45–64 49.9±3.1 5.2±1.1 10 (50%) 81.4±14.2 20 (16.7%) 4–7/55–64 59.3±2.9 5.0±1.4 13 (65%) 77.2±9.5 20 (16.7%) 8–11/45–64 49.7±2.5 10.7±0.8 11 (55%) 96.5±11.2 20 (16.7%) 8–11/55–64 57.9±1.8 10.1±1.3 15 (75%) 91.9±16.5 20 (16.7%) ≥12/45-64 48.8±2.8 15.6±2.4 15 (75%) 110.9±11.1 20 (16.7%) ≥12/55-64 58.5±2.3 16.9±2.7 15 (75%) 111.3±10.5 20 (16.7%) Source: Prepared by the authors. a Mean values±standard deviation; b percentage of females; IQ: intelligence quotient. Table 3 Normative data in the Mattis Dementia Rating Scale Age (years) 45 to 54 55 to 64 Education level (years) 4–7 8–11 12+ 4–7 8–11 12+ Total score Mean values±SD 128.7±7.6 135.9±4.8 138.9±3.2 128.6±5.6 132.2±5.2 139.2±3.4 P90 139 141 143 136 140 143 P75 134 139 141 134 138 142 Median 130 137 140 128 131 140 P25 126 134 136 124 128 133 P10 114 127 134 121 126 133 Attention Mean values±SD 35.9±1.0 36.2±1.3 36.5±0.7 35.5±1.0 35.7±1.3 36.7±0.6 P90 37 37 37 37 37 37 P75 37 37 37 36 37 37 Median 36 37 37 36 36 37 P25 35 35 36 35 35 36 P10 34 34 35 34 33 36 Initiation/Perseveration Mean values±SD 32.8±4.1 35.9±1.8 36.7±0.7 34.5±2.1 34.7±3.1 36.2±1.6 P90 37 37 37 37 37 37 P75 37 37 37 36 37 37 Median 33 37 37 35 36 37 P25 31 36 36 33 32 36 P10 26 32 35 31 31 33 Construction Mean values±SD 5.7±1.1 6.0±0.2 6.0±0.0 5.5±1.1 6.0±0.2 6.0±0.0 P90 6 6 6 6 6 6 P75 6 6 6 6 6 6 Median 6 6 6 6 6 6 P25 6 6 6 6 6 6 P10 3 6 6 3 6 6 Conceptualization Mean values±SD 31.1 ±4.1 34.7±2.9 35.6± 2.2 29.8±5.0 32.8±4.2 36.2±2.7 P90 37 38 38 37 38 39 P75 34 37 37 33 37 38 Median 31 36 36 31 34 37 P25 28 33 34 26 29 35 P10 26 29 31 23 27 31 Memory Mean values±SD 23.3±1.4 23.2±1.5 24.2±1.1 23.4±1.3 23.1±1.5 24.3±1.0 P90 25 25 25 25 25 25 P75 24 24 25 24 24 25 Median 24 24 25 23 23 25 P25 22 23 23 23 22 24 P10 21 22 22 21 21 22 Source: prepared by the authors. SD: standard deviation; P: percentile; n=20 for each group. Education level Analyses between groups showed significant differences for total and subscale scores (p<0.001), except for the CONST subscale (Table 4). Table 4 Comparisons between groups according to education level in the Mattis Dementia Rating Scale Education level (years) 4–7 8–11 ≥12 Results Mean value±SD Median (Q1;Q3) Mean value±SD Median (Q1;Q3) Mean value±SD Median (Q1;Q3) p–value Total score 128.60±6.62 128.5 (125.25;133.50) 134.03±5.26 135.50 (129.00;138.75) 139.00±3.25 140.00 (137.00;141.00) <0.001 Attention 35.68±1.00 36.00 (35.00;36.00) 35.93±1.31 36.00 (35.00;37.00) 36.55±0.64 37.00 (36.00;37.00) <0.001 Initiation/perseveration 33.63±3.30 34.50 (31.25;36.00) 35.28±2.57 36.50 (34.00;37.00) 36.40±1.24 37.00 (36.00;37.00) <0.001 Construction 5.58±1.06 6.00 (6.00;6.00) 5.95±0.22 6.00 (6.00;6.00) – – Conceptualization 30.43±4.56 31.00 (27.00;34.00) 33.73±3.71 35.00 (31.25;37.00) 35.85±2.49 36.50 (35.00;37.75) <0.001 Memory 23.30±1.32 24.00 (23.00;24.00) 23.15±1.46 23.00 (23.00;24.00) 24.20±1.04 25.00 (23.25;25.00) <0.001 Source: prepared by the authors. SD: standard deviation; n=40 for each group. Post hoc analyses showed a difference in paired comparisons among the three education levels on total scores and the CONCEPT subscale. In the I/P group, differences were observed in the comparison of the 4–7 group with the 8–11 and 12+ groups. The MEM subscale evidenced differences between the 8–11 and 12+ groups as well as between the 4–7 and 12+ groups. There were positive correlations between years of formal education and results for the total and subscale scores. Correlations were strong for the total score, moderate for the CONCEPT and I/P subscales, and weak for ATT, MEM, and CONST subscales (Table 5). Table 5 Spearman's correlation (rs) for years of formal education, intelligence quotient, and age. Years of formal education p-value IQ p-value Age p-value Total scale 0.704 <0.001 0.812 <0.001 -0.132 =0.151 Attention 0.373 <0.001 0.492 <0.001 -0.130 =0.158 Initiation/perseveration 0.463 <0.001 0.455 <0.001 -0.044 =0.635 Construction 0.243 =0.007 0.287 =0.001 -0.067 =0.469 Conceptualization 0.604 <0.001 0.730 <0.001 -0.105 =0.254 Memory 0.316 <0.001 0.361 <0.001 -0.001 =0.988 Source: prepared by the authors. IQ: intelligence quotient; n=120. Age, sex, and intelligence quotient Age and sex did not influence the performance on DRS in paired comparisons. Similarly, no correlations were verified between DRS results and these factors. Conversely, IQ significantly influenced performance. Positive correlations were strong for the total score and the CONCEPT subscale, whereas correlations were moderate for the ATT and I/P subscales and weak for the CONST and MEM subscales. DISCUSSION The present study contributes to normative data for middle-aged Brazilians in the DRS. As discussed by Foss et al., 10 studies on Brazilians within this age group are necessary. As aforementioned, the results of this study confirm the influence of education level on the performance on DRS. 3 , 8 – 10 , 20 , 21 Regarding the subtests, this influence was stronger on the CONCEPT subscale and moderate on the I/P and ATT subscales. In the CONCEPT subscale, there are essentially verbal and nonverbal tasks demanding analogies and classification. Such skills are often developed in school, justifying greater ability for people with higher education level. The I/P subscale is mainly composed of fluency tests. The education level also contributes to greater storage of semantic memory. 22 Smith et al. 23 concluded that the CONCEPT and MEM subscales, as well as the total score on DRS, display good psychometric properties. On the other hand, these authors stated that the ATT and CONST subscales should be carefully used, whereas reliability was not found for I/P. The lower influence of education on the MEM subtest in the present study reinforces its usefulness for diagnostic purposes. Lukatela et al. 5 found that the MEM subscale has a predominant role in discriminating between different types of dementia. Influence of age on the scale performance was not verified. Considering that many studies show the influence of this factor, 3 , 10 , 21 the study results may be explained by the age group of the sample, from 45 to 64 years. The influence of sex was not found either, similar to other studies. 3 , 10 , 24 However, there were many women in the sample, which may have limited this analysis. Regarding IQ, this variable was included following the recommendation of Mitrushina et al. found in a guide for normative studies on neuropsychological tests. 25 It consists in a way to verify the influence of a present ability on DRS results, in contrast to formal education, which the participants had often completed years ago. In the overall comments about the DRS, Strauss, Spreen, and Sherman stated that the scale has a relatively good concurrent validity, with good correlation with the Wechsler scales (memory and intelligence). 3 The present study showed a close relationship between the total score and the WASI, reinforcing this evidence. On the other hand, this study found a similar influence of education level and IQ on the results. Considering the time and cost of including an intelligence scale, researchers should think about its usefulness. Some authors suggest the investigation of other abilities instead of IQ such as reading habit. 26 The present study has the limitation of selecting healthy people from a hospital unit among healthcare professionals and patients’ caregivers. Multicenter studies should be further performed with a more representative sample of the Brazilian population. Finally, the authors hope that normative data in the DRS presented in this study can support Brazilian clinicians and researchers in the great challenge posed by dementia diagnosis and follow-up. This study was conducted at the Faculdade de Medicina, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte, MG, Brazil. Funding: none. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Paulo Caramelli receives support from Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico (CNPq) – Brazil (scholarship of research productivity). ==== Refs REFERENCES 1 Lezak MD Howieson DB Bigler ED Tranel D Neuropsychological assessment 5 New York Oxford University Press 2012 2 Tsoi KKF Chan JYC Hirai HW Wong SYS Kwok TCY Cognitive tests to detect dementia: a systematic review and meta-analysis JAMA Intern Med 2015 175 9 1450 1458 10.1001/jamainternmed.2015.2152 26052687 3 Strauss EH Sherman EMS Spreen O A Compendium of Neuropsychological Tests - Administration, Norms and Commentary 3 New York Oxford University Press 2006 4 Rascovsky K Salmon DP Hansen LA Galasko D Distinct cognitive profiles and rates of decline on the Mattis Dementia Rating Scale in autopsy-confirmed frontotemporal dementia and Alzheimer's disease J Int Neuropsychol Soc 2008 14 3 373 383 10.1017/S135561770808051X 18419836 5 Lukatela K Cohen RA Kessler H Jenkins MA Moser DJ Stone WF Dementia rating scale performance: a comparison of vascular and Alzheimer's dementia J Clin Exp Neuropsychol (Neuropsychology, Dev Cogn Sect A) 2000 22 4 445 454 10.1076/1380-3395(200008)22:4;1-0;FT445 6 Rosser AE Hodges JR The Dementia Rating Scale in Alzheimer's disease, Huntington's disease and progressive supranuclear palsy J Neurol 1994 241 9 531 536 10.1007/BF00873515 7799001 7 Porto CS Fichman HC Caramelli P Bahia VS Nitrini R Brazilian version of the Mattis Dementia Rating Scale: Diagnosis of mild dementia in Alzheimer’ s Disease Arq Neuro-Psiquiatr 2003 61 2-B 339 345 10.1590/S0004-282X2003000300004 8 Porto CS Caramelli P Nitrini R The influence of schooling on performance in the Mattis Dementia Rating Scale (DRS) Dement Neuropsychol 2010 4 2 126 130 10.1590/S1980-57642010DN40200009 29213675 9 Foss MP Vale F de AC Speciali JG Influência da escolaridade na avaliação neuropsicológica de idosos: aplicação e análise dos resultados da Escala de Mattis para Avaliação de Demência (Mattis Dementia Rating Scale -MDRS) Arq Neuro-Psiquiatr 2005 63 1 119 126 10.1590/S0004-282X2005000100022 10 Foss MP Carvalho VA Machado TH Reis GC Tumas V Caramelli P Mattis Dementia Rating Scale (DRS): Normative data for the Brazilian middle-age and elderly populations Dement Neuropsychol 2013 7 4 374 379 10.1590/S1980-57642013DN74000004 29213861 11 Alzheimer's Association Younger-earlier - onset Alzheimer's [Internet] [accessed on Jul. 21, 2020] Available at: https://www.alz.org/alzheimers-dementia/what-is-alzheimers/younger-early-onset 12 César KG Estudo da prevalência de comprometimento cognitivo leve e demência na cidade de Tremembé, estado de São Paulo 2014 156f. Tese (Doutorado em Ciências) São Paulo Universidade de São Paulo 2014. 10.11606/T.5.2014.tde-15082014-161857 13 Carvalho GA Caramelli P Normative data for middle-aged Brazilians in verbal fluency (Animals and FAS), trail making test (TMT) and clock drawing test (CDT) Dement Neuropsychol 2020 14 1 14 23 10.1590/1980-57642020dn14-010003 32206193 14 Almeida OP Mini Exame do Estado Mental e o diagnóstico de demência no Brasil Arq Neuro-Psiquiatr 1998 56 3B 605 612 10.1590/S0004-282X1998000400014 15 Brucki SMD Nitrini R Caramelli P Bertolucci PHF Okamoto IH Sugestões para o uso do mini-exame do estado mental no Brasil Arq Neuro-Psiquiatr 2003 61 3 B 777 781 10.1590/S0004-282X2003000500014 16 Lecrubier Y Weiller E Hergueta T Amorim P Bonora LI Lépine JP [Internet] M.I.N.I: Mini International Neuropsychiatric Interview - Brazilian version 5.0.0 2002 26 26 [accessed on Mon. day, 20xx] Available at:www.cosemssp.org.br/downloads/Cursos/Saude-Mental-DSM-07-03.pdf 17 Amorim P Mini International Neuropsychiatric Interview (MINI): validação de entrevista breve para diagnóstico de transtornos mentais Rev Bras Psiquiatr 2000 22 3 106 115 10.1590/S1516-44462000000300003 18 Wechsler D Trentini CM Yates DB Heck VS Escala Wechsler Abreviada de Inteligência — WASI: Manual São Paulo Casa do Psicólogo 2014 19 Siqueira AL Tibúrcio JD Estatística na área da saúde: conceitos, metodologia, aplicações e prática computacional Belo Horizonte: COOPMED 2011 20 Strutt AM Ayanegui IG Scott BM Mahoney ML York MK Montes LESM Influence of socio-demographic characteristics on DRS-2 performance in spanish-speaking older adults Arch Clin Neuropsychol 2012 27 5 545 556 10.1093/arclin/acs049 22693138 21 Schmidt R Freidl W Fazekas F Reinhart B Grieshofer P Koch M The Mattis Dementia Rating Scale: Normative data from 1,001 healthy volunteers Neurology 1994 44 5 964 966 10.1212/wnl.44.5.964 8190307 22 Dellatolas G Braga LW Souza LN Filho GN Queiroz E Deloche G Cognitive consequences of early phase of literacy J Int Neuropsychol Soc 2003 9 5 771 782 10.1017/S1355617703950107 12901783 23 Smith GE Ivnik RJ Malec JF Kokmen E Tangalos E Petersen RC Psychometric properties of the mattis dementia rating scale Assessmenet 1994 1 2 123 131 10.1177/1073191194001002002 24 Chan AS Choi MK Salmon DP The effects of age, education, and gender on the Mattis Dementia Rating Scale performance of elderly Chinese and American individuals J Gerontol B Psychol Sci Soc Sci 2001 56 6 356 363 10.1093/geronb/56.6.P356 25 Mitrushina M Boone KB Razani J D’Elia LF Handbook of normative data for neuropsychological assessment [ebook] 2 New York Oxford University Press 2005 26 Dotson VM Kitner-Triolo MH Evans MK Zonderman AB Effects of race and socioeconomic status on the relative influence of education and literacy on cognitive functioning J Int Neuropsychol Soc 2009 15 4 580 589 10.1017/S1355617709090821 19573276