Assessing general cognitive and adaptive abilities in adults with Down syndrome: a systematic review

• Main Authors: Sarah Hamburg, Bryony Lowe, Carla Marie Startin, Concepcion Padilla, Antonia Coppus, Wayne Silverman, Juan Fortea, Shahid Zaman, Elizabeth Head, Benjamin L. Handen, Ira Lott, Weihong Song, André Strydom
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Published: BMC 2019-08-01
• Series: Journal of Neurodevelopmental Disorders
• Subjects: Down syndrome; Cognition; Intelligence; IQ; Adaptive behaviour; Adaptive ability
• Online Access: http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s11689-019-9279-8

Abstract Background Measures of general cognitive and adaptive ability in adults with Down syndrome (DS) used by previous studies vary substantially. This review summarises the different ability measures used previously, focusing on tests of intelligence quotient (IQ) and adaptive behaviour (AB), and where possible examines floor effects and differences between DS subpopulations. We aimed to use information regarding existing measures to provide recommendations for individual researchers and the DS research community. Results Nineteen studies reporting IQ test data met inclusion for this review, with 17 different IQ tests used. Twelve of these IQ tests were used in only one study while five were used in two different studies. Eleven studies reporting AB test data met inclusion for this review, with seven different AB tests used. The only AB scales to be used by more than one study were the Vineland Adaptive Behaviour Scale (VABS; used by three studies) and the Vineland Adaptive Behavior Scale 2nd Edition (VABS-II; used by two studies). A variety of additional factors were identified which make comparison of test scores between studies problematic, including different score types provided between studies (e.g. raw scores compared to age-equivalent scores) and different participant inclusion criteria (e.g. whether individuals with cognitive decline were excluded). Floor effects were common for IQ tests (particularly for standardised test scores). Data exists to suggest that floor effects may be minimised by the use of raw test scores rather than standardised test scores. Raw scores may, therefore, be particularly useful in longitudinal studies to track change in cognitive ability over time. Conclusions Studies assessing general ability in adults with DS are likely to benefit from the use of both IQ and AB scales. The DS research community may benefit from the development of reporting standards for IQ and AB data, and from the sharing of raw study data enabling further in-depth investigation of issues highlighted by this review.