What is the intelligence quotient IQ score range of a patient with mild cognitive impairment?

A learning disability (LD) is a life-long neurobiological disorder that causes a person to have difficulty receiving, storing, processing, and producing information- in spite of average ability. Low ability refers to a person with a lower Intelligence Quotient (IQ) or ability score and profile. Below is a explanation of Intelligence Quotient (IQ) scores and profiles.

What is average?

Intelligence Quotient (IQ) is a measure of academic ability using standardized testing. Numerous subtests are administered and combined into scale or index scores. Scale scores often reported are Verbal, Performance, and Full Scale. Index scores may include Verbal Comprehension, Perceptual Organization, Working Memory, Freedom from Distractibility, and Processing Speed. It should be noted that these tests do not measure creative talent, study skills or curiosity – all factors that need careful consideration when interpreting results and using them to predict future academic performance.

Average ability is usually determined to be a Full Scale standard score of 90-110 and a percentile score of 25-75%. This is based on a midpoint standard score of 100 and percentile score of 50%. Half of the people tested are expected to receive IQ scores within this range.

Low average ability is a Full Scale standard score of 80-89 and a percentile score of 9-24%. According to LDA’s operational definition, this range also meets the criteria of “at least average” for the diagnosis of a specific learning disability in adults.

Borderline ability is usually considered to be a Full Scale standard score of 70-79 and a percentile score of 3-8%. GED Testing Service considers this range to be within average for meeting LD criteria for GED testing accommodations

Low ability is a Full Scale standard score of 69 and below and a percentile score of 2% or less. Individuals with this IQ profile may be considered Developmentally Disabled (DD) or Mentally Retarded (MR) and are now categorized under the special education area of Developmental Cognitive Disability (DCD).

What are profiles for these ranges?

Learning Disability

  • A previous diagnosis of LD or family members with LD
  • Inconsistent skill profile (high in math, low in reading OR higher oral language skills than reading, writing, or math)
  • Knowledgeable and bright in many areas, but cannot express thoughts in writing
  • Seems to know the answer, but cannot find the words to express it
  • Difficulty learning from or remembering written or visual material
  • Difficulty learning from or remembering verbal or auditory presentation
  • Difficulty remembering today what was learned yesterday
  • Often disorganized, late, loses or misplaces things

Low Average Ability

  • May have received special help in school, but is not specific about service
  • May have graduated from high school or completed GED tests, but grades and scores were just passing
  • Skills in reading, writing, or math are below expected grade level
  • Learns new skills at a slow and steady rate, but has a lot to catch up on
  • History of a non-stimulating environment when growing up
  • History of inconsistent education (moved around a lot, frequent absenteeism)
  • Prefers physical or mechanical activities to reading, writing, conversing

Borderline Ability

  • May have received special help in school, but is not specific about service
  • May have graduated from high school or completed GED tests, but grades and scores were just passing
  • Skills in reading, writing, and math (general learning difficulties) are well below expected grade level
  • Needs structured, step by step instruction typically at a slower pace than peers
  • Requires repeated practice and rehearsal of new information
  • Prefers routine and has difficulty with change
  • Has difficulty generalizing information from one situation to another
  • Thinks concretely in terms of black and white

Low Ability

  • A previous diagnosis of Mildly Mentally Impaired or Developmentally Disabled and received special services in this area
  • “Flat” profile of academic skills
  • Consistent slow processing of information
  • Takes a long time to answer questions
  • Limited ability to problem solve, reason, and generalize
  • Handwriting looks typical of a younger person
  • Whole word learner rather than phonetic learner
  • Immature social skills compared to other adults
  • Does not drive even though of age for a license
  • Lives in a supported setting such as a group home or with family members

1. Lowe DA, Rogers SA. Estimating Premorbid Intelligence among Older Adults: The Utility of the AMNART. J Aging Res. 2011 doi: 10.4061/2011/428132. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]

2. Goldstein LH, McNeil JE, editors. Clinical Neuropsychology: A Practical Guide to Assessment and Management for Clinicians. 1st Edition. England: John Wiley & Sons Ltd.; 2004. [Google Scholar]

3. Miotto EC, Benute GRG, Teixeria CAS, Lucia MCS, Aguiar PH, Scaff M. Spot-the-Word Test como instrumento neuropsicológico para avaliação de inteligência pré-mórbida em idosos: revisão da literatura. JBNC. 2008;19:20–25. [Google Scholar]

4. Lezak MD, Howieson DB, Loring DW. Neuropsychological assessment. 4th Edition. Ney York: Oxford University Press; 2004. [Google Scholar]

5. Crowell TA, Vanderploeg RD, Small BJ, Graves AB, Mortiner JA. Elderly norms for the spot-the-word test. Arch Clin Neuropsychol. 2002;17:123–130. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

6. Baddeley A, Emslie H, Nimmo-Smith I. The spot-the-word test: a robust estimate of verbal intelligence based on lexical decision. Br J Clin Psychol. 1993;32:55–65. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

7. McFarlane JM, Welch J, Rodgers J. Severity of Alzheimer's disease and effect on premorbid measures of intelligence. Br J Clin Psychol. 2006;45:453–463. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

8. Franzen MD, Burguess EJ, Smith-Seemiller L. Methods for estimating premorbid functioning. Arch Clin Neuropsychol. 1997;12:711–738. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

9. Crawford JR, Allan KM. Estimating premorbid IQ with demographic variables: Regression equations derived from a U.K. sample. Clin Neuropsychol. 1997;11:192–197. [Google Scholar]

10. Apolinário D, Brucki SMD, Ferretti REL, et al. Estimating premorbid cognitive abilities in low-educated populations. PLoS ONE. 2013;8:e60084. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

11. Nelson HE, Willison JR. The national adult Reading test (NART) 2nd Edition. Windsor: 1991. [Google Scholar]

12. Nelson HE, Mckenna P. The use current Reading ability in the assessment of dementia. Br J Soc Clin Psychol. 1975;14:259–267. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

13. Petersen RC, Smith GE, Waring SC, Ivnik RJ, Tangalos EG, Kokmen E. Mild cognitive impairment: clinical characterization and outcome. Arch Neurol. 1999;56:303–308. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

14. Petersen RC. Mild cognitive impairment as a diagnostic entity. J Int Med. 2004;256:183–194. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

15. Winblad B, Palmer K, Kivipetto M, et al. Mild cognitive impairment-beyond controversies, towards a consensus: report of international Working Group on Mild Cognitive Impairment. J Int Med. 2004;256:240–246. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

16. DSM-IV . In: Manual Diagnóstico e Estatístico de Trasntornos Mentais. 4ª ed. Batista Dayse., translator. Porto Alegre: Artes Médicas; 1995. [Google Scholar]

17. Mckhann G, Drachman D, Folstein M, Katzman R, Price D, Stadlan EM. Clinical diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease: reporto f the NINCDS-ADRD A work Group under the aupsices of Department of Health and Human Services Task Force on Alzheimer's Disease. Neurology. 1984;34:939–944. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

18. Petersen RC, Smith GE, Waring SC, Ivnik RJ, Tangalos EG, Kokmen E. Mild cognitive impairment: clinical characterization and outcome. Arch Neurol. 1999;56:303–308. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

19. Folstein MF, Folstein SE, McHugh PR. Mini-mental state. A practical method for grading the cognitive state of patients for the clinician. J Psychiatr Res. 1975;12:189–198. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

20. Brucki S MD, Nitrini R, Caramelli P, Bertolucci PHF, Okamoto IH. Sugestões para o uso do mini-exame do estado mental no Brasil. Arq Neuropsiquiatr. 2003;61:777–781. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

21. Pfeffer RI, Kurosaki TT, Harrah CH Jr, Chance JM, Filos S. Measurement of functional activities in older adults in the community. J Gerontol. 1982;37:323–329. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

22. Katz S, Ford AB, Moskowitz RW, et al. Studies of illness in the aged. The index of ADL: a standardized measure of biological and psychosocial function. J Am Med Assoc. 1963;185:914–919. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

23. Yesavage JA, Brink TL, Rose TL, et al. Development and validation of a geriatric depression screening scale: a preliminary report. J Psychiatr Res 1982- 1983;17:37–49. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

24. Malloy-Diniz LF, Lasmar VAP, Gazinelli LSR, Fuentes D, Salgado JV. The Rey Auditory-Verbal Learning Test: applicability for the Brazilian elderly population. Rev Bras Psiquiatr. 2007;29:324–329. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

25. Nascimento E. WAIS-III: Escala de Inteligência Wechesler para Adultos - manual técnico. 1ª Edition. São Paulo: Casa do Psicólogo; 2004. [Google Scholar]

26. Goodglass H, Kaplan E. The assessment of aphasia and related disorders. Pennsylvania: Lea Febiger; 1972. [Google Scholar]

27. Pinheiro AMV. Contagem de frequência de ocorrências e análise psicolinguística cde palavras expostas a crianças na faixa pré-escolar e séries iniciais do 1º grau. São Paulo, SP: Associação Brasileira de dislexia; 1996. [Google Scholar]

28. Nitrini R. Brucki SMD, Magaldi RM, Carvalho I, Perroco TR, Bottino CM, Filho WJ, Nitrini R. Demências - enfoque multidisciplinar: das bases fisiopatológicas ao diagnostico e tratamento. São Paulo: Atheneu; 2011. Neuroanatomia da cognição e do comportamento; pp. 27–39. [Google Scholar]

29. Abrisqueta-Gomes J. Malloy-Diniz LF, Fuentes D, Cosenza RM. Neuropsicologia do envelhecimento - uma abordagem multidimensional. Porto Alegre: Artmed; 2013. Memória e envelhecimento cognitivo saudável; pp. 197–209. [Google Scholar]

30. Ortiz KZ, Bertolucci PHF. Alterações da linguagem nas fases iniciais da doença de Alzheimer. Arq Neuropsiquiatr. 2005;63:311–317. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

31. Koechler C, Gindri G, Bós AJG, Mancopes R. Rev. Soc Bras Fonoaudiol. 2012;17:15–22. [Google Scholar]

32. Mansur LL, Radanovic M, Araújo GC, Taquemori LY, Greco LV. Teste de nomeação de Boston: desempenho de uma populace de São Paulo. Pró-fono Rev Atualização Científica. 2006;18:13–20. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

33. Alves L, Simões MR, Martins C. The estimation of premorbid intelligence levels among Portuguese speakers: the Irregular Word Reading Test (TeLPI) Arch Clin Neuropsychol. 2012;27:58–68. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

34. Almkvist O, Adveen M, Henning L, Tallberg IM. Estimation of premorbid cognitive function based on word knowledge The Swedish Lexical Decision Test (SLDT) Scand J Psychol. 2007;48:271–279. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]


Page 2

Estimated mean values and standard errors of scales, according to group and results of comparisons.

VariableControl M (SD)MCI M (SD)AD M (SD)P1
Age67.37 (5.89)68.92 (6.49)75.27 (5.89)<0.001*
Schooling (years)11.89 (5.07)9.8 (5.38)9.58 (4.68)0.077
MMSE27.88 (0.62)26.03 (0.44)24.34 (0.57)<0.001*
GDS151.83 (0.46)2.28 (0.33)2.94 (0.42)0.211
PFAQ0.34 (0.79)1.18 (0.57)8.41 (0.72)<0.001*
Katz6 (0.09)6.02 (0.07)5.66 (0.08)0.003*