Table 2.
Personal characteristics and cognitive performance of older participants in the WMH positive and WMH negative groups and of a young comparison group.
| WMH(+) Elderly N = 26 |
WMH(−) Elderly N = 40 |
Young N = 37 |
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| ||||||
| Mean | (SD) | Mean | (SD) | Mean | (SD) | |
| Age a,b | 75.1 | (5.8) | 73.8 | (5.3) | 22.6 | (3.3) |
| Education in years | 14.5 | (2.7) | 14.7 | (2.6) | 14.1 | (2.0) |
| Percent female | 65.4% | ---- | 65.0% | ---- | 64.9% | ---- |
| WTAR Predicted IQ | 107.6 | (10.1) | 107.8 | (9.6) | ---- | ---- |
| Percent APOE*4 carriers | 20.0% | ---- | 15.4% | ---- | ---- | ---- |
| Information processing speed | ||||||
| Perceptual Comparison RT (ms) a,b | 767.4 | (190.8) | 761.1 | (170.3) | 527.1 | (74.1) |
| Conceptual Comparison RT (ms) a,b | 780.1 | (202.8) | 770.6 | (136.7) | 623.8 | (66.4) |
| Sensorimotor RT (ms) a,b | 269.4 | (45.6) | 262.4 | (49.1) | 230.7 | (58.6) |
| Working memory | ||||||
| N Back (/60) | 32.6 | (12.7) | 32.2 | (12.0) | 38.2 | (12.8) |
| Letter – Number Sequence (/21) a,b | 9.5 | (2.9) | 9.8 | (2.8) | 12.6 | (3.0) |
| Inhibitory control | ||||||
| Stroop: # of intrusions b | 3.3 | (3.1) | 2.4 | (2.3) | 1.5 | (1.6) |
| Stroop: Response-time diff. (ms) a,b | 100.9 | (59.3) | 118.7 | (75.1) | 60.6 | (51.0) |
| Hayling: # of intrusions b | 5.6 | (4.4) | 3.9 | (3.0) | 3.1 | (3.7) |
| Hayling: Response-time diff. (ms) | 2517.9 | (2091.9) | 1668.0 | (1880.9) | 1228.6 | (2495.8) |
a
WMH-negative elderly were significantly different from the young
b
WMH-positive elderly were significantly different from the young