Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jul 12, 2026

06:23
The 4 Mountains Test: A Short Test of Spatial Memory with High Sensitivity for the Diagnosis of Pre-dementia Alzheimer's Disease
Published on: October 13, 2016
Cognitive speed-accuracy dissociation in multiple myeloma: a cross‑sectional study.
Sumayyah Patel1, Christopher Parrish2, Frances Seymour3
1School of Psychology, University of Leeds, Woodhouse, Leeds, LS2 9JT, UK. ps19sp@leeds.ac.uk.
BMC Neuroscience
|July 10, 2026
Summary
Adults with Multiple Myeloma (MM) may have subtle cognitive processing differences, particularly in efficiency, not always detected by standard tests. Advanced analyses reveal processing speed and decision-making variations in some MM patients.
Area of Science:
- Neuroscience
- Hematology
- Cognitive Psychology
Background:
- Multiple Myeloma (MM) is a hematologic malignancy.
- Cognitive impairment is a potential complication in MM patients.
- Current screening tools may not fully capture subtle cognitive deficits.
Purpose of the Study:
- To investigate cognitive differences in adults with MM compared to healthy controls.
- To identify domain-specific cognitive deficits in MM.
- To assess the adequacy of standard screening tools for MM-related cognitive changes.
Main Methods:
- Cross-sectional study comparing 45 MM patients and 40 controls.
- Utilized Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA), mood/functioning scales, and a computerized cognitive battery.
- Employed ANCOVAs, Bayesian analyses, and EZ drift diffusion modeling (EZ-DDM) for detailed analysis.
Main Results:
- MM group showed lower MoCA scores, with a higher proportion meeting criteria for possible impairment.
- No significant group differences in accuracy or mean reaction time (RT) on computerized tasks.
- Bayesian analyses revealed ~22% of MM patients had multi-domain RT inefficiencies, particularly in cognitive flexibility and semantic processing.
- EZ-DDM indicated slower evidence accumulation (reduced drift rates) and prolonged non-decision times in MM.
Conclusions:
- Cognitive deficits in MM are subtle, affecting processing efficiency more than accuracy.
- Standard screening and group comparisons may miss individual cognitive variability in MM.
- Sensitive analytical approaches are crucial for characterizing heterogeneous cognitive profiles in MM.
- Further longitudinal and neuroimaging studies are warranted.
