1996
DOI: 10.1007/bf01997792
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Trail making test: normative values from 287 normal adult controls

Abstract: The Trail Making Test (TMT), which explores visual-conceptual and visual-motor tracking, is a frequently used neuropsychological test because of its ease of administration and sensitivity to brain damage. In this paper, norms are provided for the time scores derived from parts A and B, and for the (B-A) difference. The data were collected from 287 adult Italian subjects stratified by gender, schooling and age (from 20 to 79 years). The test scores were affected by age, education and general intelligence (as ex… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

18
626
4
7

Year Published

2004
2004
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 937 publications
(655 citation statements)
references
References 21 publications
18
626
4
7
Order By: Relevance
“…Part A of the Trail Making Test (Trails A) contains only numbered circles whereas Part B (Trails B) includes both numbered and lettered circles and requires alternation between number and letter while connecting the circles in the correct order. Both parts require visual scanning ability, motor speed and dexterity, and correlate well with other tests of speeded processing, but Part B is also considered a measure of cognitive flexibility, alternating attention, and ability to inhibit a dominant but incorrect response (Kortte, Horner, & Windham, 2002;Strauss et al, 2006).The Trail Making Test is reliable, valid, and sensitive to neurological impairment and brain damage (Giovagnoli et al, 1996;Lezak et al, 2004). Calculating the difference in completion time between Part B and Part A (Trails B -Trails A) is suggested for interpretation of executive deficits and eliminating the influence of visual and motor abilities on performance (Strauss et al, 2006).…”
Section: Assessmentsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Part A of the Trail Making Test (Trails A) contains only numbered circles whereas Part B (Trails B) includes both numbered and lettered circles and requires alternation between number and letter while connecting the circles in the correct order. Both parts require visual scanning ability, motor speed and dexterity, and correlate well with other tests of speeded processing, but Part B is also considered a measure of cognitive flexibility, alternating attention, and ability to inhibit a dominant but incorrect response (Kortte, Horner, & Windham, 2002;Strauss et al, 2006).The Trail Making Test is reliable, valid, and sensitive to neurological impairment and brain damage (Giovagnoli et al, 1996;Lezak et al, 2004). Calculating the difference in completion time between Part B and Part A (Trails B -Trails A) is suggested for interpretation of executive deficits and eliminating the influence of visual and motor abilities on performance (Strauss et al, 2006).…”
Section: Assessmentsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Most studies have examined how age affects the time to complete TMT-A and TMT-B; [11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18] these studies have concluded that the time for TMT completion increases with age. In contrast, conclusions regarding the influence of educational level on the TMT have been inconsistent between studies; some studies have shown that educational level affects both parts of the TMT, [11][12][13][14]16,19 with the time for completion of TMT-A and TMT-B being shorter for persons of higher educational level, but four studies have found that education affects only TMT-B. 15,17,18,20 However, these latter studies included participants with relatively high educational levels only, suggesting that the effects in a population with a relatively low educational level were not fully investigated.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Aetiology: A= ruptured angioma, An= ruptured aneurysm, H= haermorrhage, I= ischemia, SAH= Subarachnoid hemorrhage;TBI= traumatic brain injury; Lesion site: F= frontal, P= parietal, O= occipital, T= temporal, AX= axonal damage; Lesion side: L= left, R= right; 1 multiple left sided parafalcine lesions; 2 immediately post-onset (13 months before entering the experiment) performance was right27 left19, indicative of a neglect which recovered over time; NA= movement impairment; *performance below cut-off score (i.e. abnormal) a (Basso, Capitani, & Laiacona, 1987); b (Carlesimo, Caltagirone, & Gainotti, 1996) ; c (Capasso & Miceli, 2001); d (Giovagnoli et al, 1996); e (Della Sala, MacPherson, Phillips, Sacco, & Spinnler, 2003); f (Wilson, Cockburn, & Halligan, 1987); g (Morris, 1993); h (Katz, Ford, Moskowitz, Jackson, & Jaffe, 1963). = 4.301, p < 005).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…(ii) executive function: verbal fluency (Carlesimo, Caltagirone & Gainotti, 1996), trail making B-A (Giovagnoli et al, 1996), cognitive estimates (Della Sala, MacPherson, Phillips, Sacco & Spinnler, 2003), (iii) visuospatial attention: star cancellation (Wilson, Cockburn & Halligan, 1987) and (iv) processing speed: trail making A (Giovagnoli et al, 1996). All patients presented with clear evidence of the classical amnesic syndrome characterized by intact immediate verbal recall, as assessed via forward digit span (Carlesimo et al, 1996) but severely impaired LTM, as assessed via word list learning (i.e.…”
Section: Participantsmentioning
confidence: 99%