The Test of Everyday Attention (TEA) was designed to address some of the limitations of established measures of attention. However, very few studies have examined its clinical utility. A group of 35 patients who had sustained a severe TBI were compared with 35 age- and education-matched controls on the TEA, Stroop, SDMT, WMS-R Digit Span, Ruff 2s and 7s Selective Attention Test, and PASAT. Of the TEA subtests, only the Map and Telephone Search subtests of the TEA produced significant differences between the two groups, suggesting a deficit in visual selective attention following TBI. Principal components analysis revealed a four-component / factor structure of attention, largely consistent with previous studies. A logistic regression found that the TEA Map Search and Modified Colour-Word subtest of the Stroop were best able to discriminate between the TBI and control groups. When the TBI group was divided into Early (< 1 year post injury) and Late ( > 2 years post injury) groups, there was an additional deficit on the Lottery (sustained attention) subtest in the Early TBI group, indicating that there is some recovery in attentional function beyond 1 year post injury.

Attentional problems have frequently been identi®ed following traumatic brain injuries (TBIs) using both clinical assessments and self-report measures. Unfortunately, most measures of attention do not enable us to determine the underlying basis of these attentional de®cits. One exception is Posner's Covert Orienting of Attention Task (COAT), which is designed to identify some of the fundamental mental operations underlying attention. This study sought to determine whether the COAT task could identify discrete attentional de®cits following TBI beyond those caused by reduced speed of information processing. Thirty ®ve patients who had sustained a severe TBI were compared to 35 age-matched controls. Results revealed that, although the reaction times of the patients with TBI were signi®cantly slower than the controls, there were no differences between the two groups in terms of their ability to disengage, move, and engage their attention. The introduction of a secondary (language) task produced no signi®cant difference between the two groups on the COAT task. However, there was a signi®cant difference between the two groups on the language-based task, suggesting a de®cit in auditory-verbal attention under dual task conditions.

General cognitive function and specific language and memory processing abilities were compared in dementia of the Alzheimer type (DAT), depressed and normal control subjects. Several tests clearly differentiated between DAT and depressed subjects including a verbal fluency task, several components of a word memory test, an IQ deterioration index, and the Mini-Mental State Examination. The inability of DAT subjects to take advantage of semantic cues in both the verbal fluency and in the memory test contrasted with the performance of depressed and normal subjects, who were able to benefit from semantic cues. Depressed patients displayed deficits compared with normal controls on the more effortful verbal fluency task but not on the memory test. Tasks that are least effortful, rely on semantic associations, and require declarative memory are most likely to discriminate between DAT and depression.