Persian version of frontal assessment battery: Correlations with formal measures of ‎executive functioning and providing normative data for Persian population

  • Sina Asaadi ‎Functional Neurosurgery Research Center, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical ‎Sciences, Tehran, Iran
  • Farzad Ashrafi ‎Functional Neurosurgery Research Center, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical ‎Sciences, Tehran, Iran
  • Mahmoud Omidbeigi ‎School of Medicine, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran , Iran‎
  • Zahra Nasiri ‎Functional Neurosurgery Research Center, Shahid Beheshti University of ‎Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
  • Hossein Pakdaman ‎Department of Neurology, School of Medicine AND Loghman Hospital, Tehran University ‎of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran‎
  • Ali Amini-Harandi ‎Functional Neurosurgery Research Center, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical ‎Sciences, Tehran, Iran
Keywords: Executive Function, Parkinson’s Disease, Frontal Assessment Battery


Background: Cognitive impairment in patients with Parkinson’s disease (PD) mainly involves executive function (EF). The frontal assessment battery (FAB) is an efficient tool for the assessment of EFs. The aims of this study were to determine the validity and reliability of the psychometric properties of the Persian version of FAB and assess its correlation with formal measures of EFs to provide normative data for the Persian version of FAB in patients with PD.Methods: The study recruited 149 healthy participants and 49 patients with idiopathic PD. In PD patients, FAB results were compared to their performance on EF tests. Reliability analysis involved test-retest reliability and internal consistency, whereas validity analysis involved convergent validity approach. FAB scores compared in normal controls and in PD patients matched for age, education, and Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) score.Results: In PD patients, FAB scores were significantly decreased compared to normal controls, and correlated with Stroop test and Wisconsin Card Sorting Test (WCST). In healthy subjects, FAB scores varied according to the age, education, and MMSE. In the FAB subtest analysis, the performances of PD patients were worse than the healthy participants on similarities, fluency tasks, and Luria’s motor series.Conclusions: Persian version of FAB could be used as a reliable scale for the assessment of frontal lobe functions in Iranian patients with PD. Furthermore, normative data provided for the Persian version of this test improve the accuracy and confidence in the clinical application of the FAB.


1. M.J. Marti, E. Tolosa, Parkinson disease: new guidelines for diagnosis of Parkin-son disease, Nat. Rev. Neurosci. 2013;9;190–191.
2. K.C. Breen, G. Drutyte, Non-motor symptoms of Parkinson’s disease: thepatient’s perspective, J. Neural Transm. 2013;120;531–535.
3. N. Klepac, V. Trkulja, M. Relja, T. Babic, Is quality of life in non- dementedParkinson’s disease patients related to cognitive performance? A clinic-basedcross-sectional study, Eur. J. Neurol. 2008 ;15;128–133.
4. Moorhouse P, Gorman M, Rockwood K. Comparison of EXIT-25 and the frontal Assessment Battery for evaluation of executive dysfunction in patients attending a memory clinic. Dement GeriatrCognDisord 2009:27:424-8.
5.Poewe W. Non-motor symptoms of Parkinson’s disease. Eur J Neurol. 2008:15:14-20.
6. Dubois B, Slachevsky A, Litvan I, PillonB.The FAB, a frontal assessment battery at bedside.Neurology.2000;55:1621–1626.
7. Nagata T, Shinagawa S, Ochiai Y, et al. Association between executive dysfunction and hippocampal volume in Alzheimer’s disease. IntPsychogeriatr 2010;25:1-8.
8. Slachevsky A, Villalpando JM, Sarazin M, Hahn-Barma V, Pillon B, Dubois B. Frontal Assessment Battery and differential diagnosis of frontotemporal dementia and Alzheimer disease. Arch Neurol 2004;61:1104-1107.
9. Lima CF, Meireles LP, Fonseca R, Castro SL, Garrett C. The Frontal Assessment Battery in Parkinson’s disease and correlations with formal measures of executive functioning. J Neurol. 2008;255:1756-1761.
10. Rodrigues GR, Souza CP, Cetlin RS, et al. Use of the frontal assessment battery in evaluating executive dysfunction in patients with Huntington’s disease. J Neurol 2009;256:1809-1815.
11.Cunha PJ, Nicastri S, de Andrade AG, Bolla KI. The frontal assessment battery (FAB) reveals neurocognitive dysfunction in substance-dependent individuals in distinct executive domains: abstrac reasoning, motor programming, and cognitive flexibility. Addict Behav 2010;35:875-881.
12. Oguro H, Yamaguchi S, Abe S, Ishida Y, Bokura H, Kobayashi S. Differentiating Alzheimer’s disease from subcortical vascular dementia with the FAB test. J Neurol. 2006;253:1490–1494.
13. Apollonio I, Leone M, Isella V, PiamartaF, Consoli T, Villa ML. The frontal assessment battery (FAB): normative values in an Italian population sample. Neurol Sci. 2005; 26:108–116.
14.Lavarone A, Ronga B, Pellegrino L, Lorè E, Vitaliano S, Galeone F. The frontal assessment battery (FAB): Normative data from an Italian sample and performance of patients with Alzheimer’s disease and frontotemporal dementia. Func Neurol. 2004;19:191–195.
15. Hughes AJ, Ben-ShlomoY, Daniel SE, Lees AJ. What features improve the accuracy of clinical diagnosis in Parkinson’s disease: a clinicopathologicstudy.Neurology. 1992;42:1142–1146.
16. Folstein M, Folstein S, McHugh P. Mini-Mental State: A practical method for grading the cognitive state of patients for the clinician. J Psych Res. 1975;12:189–198.
17. Takagi R, Kajimoto Y, Kamiyoshi S, Miwa H, Kondo T. The frontal assessment battery at bedside (FAB) in patients with Parkinson’s disease. No ToShinkei. 2002;54:897–902.
18.D.Aarsland,K.andersen,J.P.Larsen,A.Lolk,H.Nielsen,andP.Kragh-Sorensen. Risk of dementia in Parkinson’s disease: a community-based,prospectivestudy. Neurology; 2001. 56(6): 730-736.
19. Lezak M, Howieson D, Loring D. Neuropsychological assessment. Oxford University Press New York; 2004.4th Edition.
20. Burgess P. Assessment of executive function. In: HalliganP,Kischka U, Marshall J, eds. Handbook of Clinical Neuropsychology.Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2003:302–321.
21. Guedj E, Allali G, Goetz C, Le Ber I, VolteauM, Lacomblez L et al. Frontal Assessment Battery is a marker of dorsolateral and medial frontal functions: aSPECT study in frontotemporal dementia. J Neurol Sci. 2008;273: 84–87.
22.Fahn S, Elton RS, Jenner P,Marsden CD, TeychenneP,Calne DB, members of the UPDRS Development Committee. Unified Parkinson’s disease rating scale. Recent Developments in Parkinson’s Disease. Florham Park NJ: Macmillan Publishers; 1987:153–163.
23. Grant D, Berg A. Wisconsin Card Sorting Test. USA: Psychological Assessment Resources, Inc. 1993.
24.Taylor, A. E., Saint-Cyr, J. A., & Lang, A. E.. Frontal lobedysfunction in Parkinson's disease. Brain, 1986,109, 845–883.
25. Alexander GE, Crutcher MD. Functional architecture of basal ganglia circuits:
neural substrates of parallel processing. Trends Neurosci 1990;13(7):266–71
26.Haber SN, Fudge JL, McFarland NR. Striatonigrostriatal pathways in primates form an ascending spiral from the shell to the dorsolateral striatum. J Neurosci 2000;20(6):2369–82.
27. Parent A. Extrinsic connections of the basal ganglia. Trends Neurosci 1990;13(7): 254–8
28.Sawamoto N, Piccini P, Hotton G, Pavese N, Thielemans K, Brooks DJ. Cognitive deficits and striato-frontal dopamine release in Parkinson's disease. Brain 2008;131:1294–302.
29.Owen AM. Cognitive dysfunction in Parkinson's disease: the role of frontostriatal circuitry. Neuroscientist 2004;10(6):525–37.
30.Melo LMB, Barbosa ER, Caramelli P. Declíniocognitivo e demênciaassociados à doença de Parkinson: característicasclínicas e tratamento. Rev PsiqClín 2007;34:176-183.
31.Bosboom JLW, Stoffers D, Wolters EC. Cognitive dysfunc¬tion and dementia in Parkinson’s disease.J Neural Transm 2004;111:1303-1315.
32. KenangilG,OrkenDN, UrE, FortaH,Frontal Assessment Battery in Patients With Parkinson Disease in a Turkish Population. Cog BehavNeurol. 2010;23:26-28.
33.Kugo A, Terado S, Ata T, İdoY,Kado Y, Ishihara T et al, Japanese version of the frontal assessment battery for dementia.Psychiatry Res. 2007;153: 69-75.
34.Tuncay N, KayseriliG, Eser E, ZorluY, AkdedeB, Yener G. Validation and Reliability of The Frontal Assessment Battery (FAB) in Turkish.JNeurolSci. 2013;30:502-514.
35.Castigliona S, Pelati O, Zuffi M, SomalvicoF,Marino L, Tentorio T et al. The frontal assessment battery does not differentiate frontotemporal dementia from Alzheimer's Disease. Dement GeriatrCognDisord.2006; 22: 125-131.
36.Beato R, Nitrini R, Formigoni A, CaramelliP . Brazilian version of the Frontal Assessment Battery (FAB): Preliminary data on administration to healthy elderly. Dement Neuropsychol. 2007:1:59–65.
37.Mok VC, Wong A, Yim P, Fu M. The validity and reliability of Chinese frontal assessment battery in evaluating executive dysfunction among Chinese patients with small subcortical infarct.AlzDis.AssocDisord. 2004;18: 68-74.
38.Nakaaki S, Murata Y, Sato J, Shinagawa Y , Matsui T, Tatsumi H et al. Reliability and validity of the Japanese version of the frontal assessment battery in patients with the frontal variant of frontotemporal dementia, Psychiatry ClinNeurosci.2007; 61:78-83.
How to Cite
Asaadi S, Ashrafi F, Omidbeigi M, Nasiri Z, Pakdaman H, Amini-Harandi A. Persian version of frontal assessment battery: Correlations with formal measures of ‎executive functioning and providing normative data for Persian population. IJNL. 15(1):16-2.
Original Article(s)