Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2024 Jun 14.
Published in final edited form as: Neurobiol Dis. 2023 May 29;183:106171. doi: 10.1016/j.nbd.2023.106171

Table 1.

Samples’ demographic and neurocognitive data.

HCs (n = 90) bvFTD (n = 42) AD (n = 54) PD (n = 59) Stats Post-hoc comparisons

Demographics
Sex (M:F) 39:51 26:16 22:32 35:24 χ2 = 7.87, P = 0.048* HCs-bvFTD: P = 0.071; HCs-AD: P = 0.896; HCs-PD: P = 0.081
Age a 71.21 (6.82) 69.45 (9.67) 74.65 (5.82) 67.9 (9.01) F = 7.69, P < 0.001*, ηp2 = 0.08 HCs-bvFTD: P = 0.618; HCs-AD: P = 0.051; HCs-PD: P = 0.054
Education 13.4 (3.92) 13.98 (4.61) 11.7 (4.82) 11.8 (4.7) F = 3.61, P = 0.013*, ηp2 = 0.04 HCs-bvFTD: P = 0.899; HCs-AD: P = 0.120; HCs-PD: P = 0.138
Handedness (R:L) 85:1 35:1 50:1 56:2
Cognitive assessment
MoCA a 25.72 (3.15) 20.69 (4.94) 17.27 (4.38) 23.33 (4.44) F = 50.22, P < 0.001*, ηp2 = 0.39 HCs-bvFTD: P < 0.001*; HCs-AD: P < 0.001*; HCs-PD: P = 0.003*
IFS a 22.08 (3.69) 18.81 (5.26) 14.95 (4.98) 19.21 (4.85) F = 27.39, P < 0.001*, ηp2 = 0.26 HCs-bvFTD: P = 0.001*; HCs-AD: P < 0.001*; HCs-PD: P = 0.001*

Results are presented as mean (SD). The asterisk (*) indicates significant differences with an alpha level of P < 0.05.

a

indicates variables with significant differences (P < 0.05) between neurodegenerative groups, precluding comparisons between them in our target measures. Demographic and cognitive data were assessed through ANOVAs and Tukey post-hoc pairwise comparisons –except for sex, which was analyzed via Pearson’s chi-squared (χ2) test. Effects sizes were calculated through partial eta (ηp2). AD: Alzheimer’s disease, bvFTD: behavioral-variant frontotemporal dementia, HCs: healthy controls, IFS: INECO Frontal Screening, MoCA: Montreal Cognitive Assessment, PD: Parkinson’s disease.