Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2023 Aug 9.
Published in final edited form as: J Rural Soc Sci. 2019 Nov 8;34(2):2–16.

Table 1:

Task Specific Mean Scores and Mean as a % of Total Possible Points both Alabama Rural Veterans and Nasreddine et al. 2005, Canadian Normative Data

Alabama Rural Veterans
Canada Nasreddine et al. 2005
Task Mean (SD) Mean % Points Possible Mean (SD) Mean % Points Possible
Trails (1 pt)* - - 0.87 (0.34) 87%
Cube (1 pt) - - 0.71 (0.46) 71%
Clock (3 pts) - - 2.65 (0.65) 88%
Naming (3 pts) 2.78 (0.50) 93% 2.66 (0.36) 87%
Memory (4 pts) 2.39 (1.72) 60% 3.73 (1.27) 93%
Digit Span (2 pts) 1.63 (0.57) 82% 1.82 (0.44) 91%
Letter A (1pt) 0.91 (0.29) 91% 0.97 (0.18) 97%
Serial 7 (3 pts) 2.26 (0.92) 75% 2.89 (0.41) 96%
Sentence rep (2 pts) 1.59 (0.62) 80% 1.83 (0.37) 92%
Fluency F (1 pt) 0.73 (0.45) 73% 0.87 (0.34) 87%
Abstraction (2 pts) 1.74 (0.59) 87% 1.83 (0.43) 92%
Orientation (6 pts) 5.87 (0.71) 98% 5.99 (0.11) 99%
Total (Educ. Adjusted) 23.66 (4.20) 78% 27.27 (2.20) 91%
*

Note. Item-level scores were not available for the Visuospatial tasks in the Alabama Veteran Rural Health Initiative Study since data were entered in accordance with the fields represented on the Original Version 7.1 published by Nasreddine et al. 2005. Domains with discrepancies of more than 10 percent between groups are bolded and discussed as potentially meaningful.