To review the use of the Months Backwards Test
(MBT) in clinical and research contexts.
METHODS: We conducted a systematic review of
reports relating to the MBT based upon a search of
PsychINFO and MEDLINE between January 1980 and
December 2014. Only reports that specifically described
findings pertaining to the MBT were included. Findings
were considered in terms of rating procedures, testing
performance, psychometric properties, neuropsychological
studies and use in clinical populations.
RESULTS: We identified 22 data reports. The MBT is
administered and rated in a variety of ways with very
little consistency across studies. It has been used to
assess various cognitive functions including focused
and sustained attention as well as central processing
speed. Performance can be assessed in terms of the
ability to accurately complete the test without errors
(“MB accuracy”), and time taken to complete the test
(“MB duration”). Completion time in cognitively intact
subjects is usually < 20 s with upper limits of 60-90 s
typically applied in studies. The majority of cognitively
intact adults can complete the test without error such
that any errors of omission are strongly suggestive of
cognitive dysfunction. Coverage of clinical populations,
including those with significant cognitive difficulties is
high with the majority of subjects able to engage with
MBT procedures. Performance correlates highly with
other cognitive tests, especially of attention, including
the digit span backwards, trailmaking test B, serial
threes and sevens, tests of simple and complex choice
reaction time, delayed story recall and standardized list
learning measures. Test-retest and inter-rater reliability
are high (both > 0.90). Functional magnetic resonance
imaging studies comparing the months forward test
and MBT indicate greater involvement of more complex
networks (bilateral middle and inferior frontal gyri, the
posterior parietal cortex and the left anterior cingulate
gyrus) for backwards cognitive processing. The MBT
has been usefully applied to the study of a variety of
clinical presentations, for both cognitive and functional
assessment. In addition to the assessment of major
neuropsychiatric conditions such as delirium, dementia
and Mild Cognitive Impairment, the MBT has been
used in the assessment of concussion, profiling of
neurocognitive impairments in organic brain disorders
and Parkinson’s disease, prediction of delirium risk in
surgical patients and medication compliance in diabetes.
The reported sensitivity for acute neurocognitive
disturbance/delirium in hospitalised patients is estimated
at 83%-93%. Repeated testing can be used to identify
deteriorating cognitive function over time.
CONCLUSION: The MBT is a simple, versatile tool
that is sensitive to significant cognitive impairment.
Performance can be assessed according to accuracy and
speed of performance. However, greater consistency in
administration and rating is needed. We suggest two
approaches to assessing performance - a simple (pass/
fail) method as well as a ten point scale for rating test
performance (467).
Funding
Development of a structure identification methodology for nonlinear dynamic systems