NeuroRehabilitation 41 (2017) 593–603 593

DOI:10.3233/NRE-172241
IOS Press

Rey–Osterrieth Complex Figure – copy

and immediate recall (3 minutes):
Normative data for Spanish-speaking
pediatric populations
J.C. Arango-Lasprillaa,b,∗ , D. Riverab , M.M. Ertlc , J.M. Muñoz Mancillad , C.E. Garcı́a-Guerreroe ,
W. Rodriguez-Irizarryf , A. Aguayo Arelisg , Y. Rodrı́guez-Agudeloh , M.D. Barrios Nevadoi ,
M. Vélez-Cotoj , T.P. Yacelga Poncek , A. Rigabertl , C. Garcı́a de la Cadenam , S. Pohlenz Amadorn ,
E. Vergara-Moragueso , M. Soto-Añarip , A.I. Peñalver Guiaq , M. Saracostti Schwartzmanr
and R. Ferrer-Cascaless
a IKERBASQUE, Basque Foundation for Science, Bilbao, Spain
b BioCruces Health Research Institute, Cruces University Hospital, Barakaldo, Spain
c Division of Counseling Psychology, University at Albany, SUNY, NY, USA
d Universidad Autónoma de Asunción (UAA), Asunción, Paraguay
e Mindpedia Centro de Psicologı́a Avanzada, Monterrey, México
f Universidad Interamericana de Puerto Rico, Recinto de San Germán, Puerto Rico
g Departamento de investigación, Psicologı́a, Universidad Enrique Dı́az de León, Guadalajara, Mexico
h Instituto Nacional de Neurologı́a y Neurocirugı́a, MVS, Ciudad de México, México
i Research Center CERNEP, Almeria University, Almerı́a, Spain
j CIMCYC-The Mind, Brain and Behaviour Research Centre, Universidad de Granada, Granada, Spain
k Escuela de Psicologı́a, Universidad de Las Américas, Quito, Ecuador
l Department of Psychology, Universidad Loyola Andalucı́a, Sevilla, Spain
m Departamento de Psicologı́a, Universidad del Valle de Guatemala, Guatemala City, Guatemala
n Escuela de Ciencias Psicológicas, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de Honduras, Tegucigalpa, Honduras
o Universidad Internacional de la Rioja (UNIR), Logroño, Spain
p Universidad Católica San Pablo, Arequipa, Peru
q National Institute of Neurology and Neurosurgery INN, Havana, Cuba
r Universidad de la Frontera, Temuco, Chile
s Department of Health Psychology, University of Alicante, Spain

Abstract.
OBJECTIVE: To generate normative data for the Rey–Osterrieth Complex Figure (ROCF) in Spanish-speaking pediatric
populations.
METHOD: The sample consisted of 4,373 healthy children from nine countries in Latin America (Chile, Cuba, Ecuador,
Guatemala, Honduras, Mexico, Paraguay, Peru, and Puerto Rico) and Spain. Each participant was administered the ROCF
as part of a larger neuropsychological battery. The ROCF copy and immediate recall (3 minutes) scores were normed using
multiple linear regressions and standard deviations of residual values. Age, age2 , sex, and mean level of parental education
(MLPE) were included as predictors in the analyses.

∗ Address for correspondence: Juan Carlos Arango Lasprilla,

Ph.D., BioCruces Health Research Institute, Cruces University de Cruces s/n. 48903, Barakaldo. Bizkaia, Spain. Tel.: +34 94600
Hospital, IKERBASQUE, Basque Foundation for Science, Plaza 6000/Ext. 7963; E-mail: jcalasprilla@gmail.com.

1053-8135/17/$35.00 © 2017 – IOS Press and the authors. All rights reserved
594 J.C. Arango-Lasprilla et al. / Rey–Osterrieth Complex Figure Test

RESULTS: The final multiple linear regression models showed main effect for age on copy and immediate recall scores,
such that scores increased linearly as a function of age. Age2 affected ROCF copy score for all countries, except Puerto
Rico; and ROCF immediate recall scores for all countries, except Chile, Guatemala, Honduras, Paraguay, and Puerto Rico.
Models indicated that children whose parent(s) had a MLPE >12 years obtained higher scores compared to children whose
parent(s) had a MLPE ≤12 years for Chile, Puerto Rico, and Spain in the ROCF copy, and Paraguay and Spain for the ROCF
immediate recall. Sex affected ROCF copy and immediate recall score for Chile and Puerto Rico with girls scoring higher
than boys.
CONCLUSIONS: This is the largest Spanish-speaking pediatric normative study in the world, and it will allow neuropsy-
chologists from these countries to have a more accurate approach to interpret the ROCF Test in pediatric populations.

Keywords: Rey–Osterrieth Complex Figure, neuropsychology, Spanish-speaking populations, pediatric population

1. Introduction Waber & Holmes, 1985). Evidence for convergent

In 1941, Swiss psychologist André Rey designed
the Rey-Osterrieth Complex Figure Test (ROCF) to
examine visuospatial ability and memory in patients
with traumatic brain injuries (Rey, 1941). The ROCF
was later standardized by Paul-Alexandre Osterri-
eth in 1944, who proposed a scoring system for
administration and collected the first set of norma-
tive data for children and adults (Shin, Park, Park,
Seol, & Kwon, 2006). Since its initial validation, the
ROCF has become one of the most widely used neu-
ropsychological assessments to assess constructional
and non-verbal memory abilities (Ardila & Rosselli,
1994; Rosselli & Ardila, 1991).
The ROCF uses an intricate stimulus that is asym-
metrical in its design to assess cognitive performance
through recognition and recall skills (Fastenau, 1996;
Shin et al., 2006). Many cognitive abilities are nec-
essary for good performance, and as such, the test
is used to evaluate several different brain functions,
including attention, working memory, visuospatial
abilities, and planning (Watanabe et al., 2005). For
example, the ROCF task involves viewing a complex
figure and copying it; next, the individual repro-
duces it from memory, either immediately, following
a delay, or both (Shin et al., 2006). The ROCF is often
used to examine deficits due to traumatic brain injury
in neurological patients, to test for dementia, and to
study children’s cognitive development (Kasai et al.,
2006; Watanabe et al., 2005). Both young, developing
children and older children or adults with weaknesses
in the aforementioned abilities typically find the task
quite challenging (Akshoomoff, Feroleto, Doyle, &
Stiles, 2002; Waber & Holmes, 1985).
The ROCF has received psychometric support for
both reliability and validity in past research with
pediatric populations. Reliability among pediatric
populations tends to be high for both copy pro-
duction (␣ = 0.95) and recall production (␣ = 0.94;
validity is also supported: six to eight year-old chil-
dren’s scores on the ROCF correlate with other
measures of visuospatial, constructional, and fine
motor ability [e.g., Hoover Visual Organization Test
(Hooper, 1983), Block Design subtest of the Wechsler
Primary and Preschool Scale of Intelligence-Revised
(Wechsler, 1989), the Grooved Pegboard (Matthews
& Kløve, 1964; Frisk, Jakobson, Knight, & Robert-
son, 2005)]. The ROCF’s psychometric support has
contributed to its popularity as a widely used neuro-
logical assessment.
Several variables have been found to influence test
performance among pediatric populations, although
age has the most notable influence (Beltrán Dulcey
& Solı́s Uribe, 2012; De Leeuw, 2010; Rosselli &
Ardila, 1991). Copy scores tend to increase between
the ages of 12 and 16 (Meyers & Meyers, 1996),
and children between the ages of 13 and 16 tend
to perform better on copying the figure accurately
than children who are nine to 12 years old (Beltrán
Dulcey & Solı́s Uribe, 2012). Age also greatly influ-
ences ability for children and adolescents to recall
the figure, with scores increasingly greatly between
ages six and 12, with slower growth between ages
12 and 17 (Meyers & Meyers, 1996; Mitrushina,
Boone, Razani, & D’Elia, 2005). Evidence for a gen-
der difference on the ROCF has been equivocal. Two
studies found conflicting findings, such that girls out-
performed boys between the ages of eight and 12
in one study (Karapetsas & Kantas, 1991), and boys
outperformed girls in the other (Ardila & Rosselli,
1994). However, other studies have not found a gen-
der difference (Beltrán Dulcey & Solı́s Uribe, 2012;
Demsky, Carone, Burns, & Sellers, 2000). Although
educational level has been found to influence adults’
performance on the ROCF, an effect for pediatric
populations has not been supported (Beltrán Dul-
cey & Solı́s Uribe, 2012; Meyers & Meyers, 1995).
Finally, performance on the ROCF has also been
 J.C. Arango-Lasprilla et al. / Rey–Osterrieth Complex Figure Test
found to be directly related to intellectual ability, such
that individuals with learning disabilities exhibit lit-
tle improvement on the test as they age (Waber &
Bernstein, 1995).
Normative data has been derived for children
between the ages of five and 14 in the US, Mexico,
and Colombia (Ardila & Rosselli, 1994; Galindo &
Cortes, 2003; Karapetsas & Kantas, 1991; Waber &
Holmes, 1985, 1986). Using qualitative scoring sys-
tems, children’s ability to copy and recall the figure
from memory was assessed on several dimensions,
including accuracy (e.g., how much of the design was
recalled); errors (i.e., distortions); organization (abil-
ity to format the figure; e.g., align all four sides);
and style (i.e., continuity of lines; Shin et al., 2006).
Between the ages of six and eight, children’s ability
to copy the figure improves dramatically (Waber &
Holmes, 1985), most likely due to an improvement in
approach and organization. By age nine, children can
reliably produce all parts of the design, and changes
after that age tend to reflect the increased capacity to
plan and organize reproduction of the figure (Ardila
& Rosselli, 1994; Waber & Holmes, 1985). Six year-
old children score between 14.5 and 16.5 on copying
the image, whereas children ages 14 and above begin
to score more similarly to adults, whose average score
tends to be around 32 (Ardila & Rosselli, 1994; Kolb
& Whishaw, 1985; Meyers & Meyers, 1996; Rosselli
& Ardila, 1991; Shin et al., 2006).
In terms of recalling the figure from memory, in
past research 57% of children between the ages of
five and 14 were able to reproduce the design from
memory immediately after copying it, and 43% were
able to after a 20-minute delay (Waber & Holmes,
1986). At every age level, more errors are made
when recalling the image than when copying the
image; in addition, errors tend to decrease at each
age level, such that five year-olds tend to make sig-
nificantly more errors than older children (Waber &
Holmes, 1986). In terms of organization scores, five
year-old children tend to score the lowest, and these
scores generally increase each year up through age 14
(Waber & Holmes, 1986). Regarding style, younger
children tended to focus on specific parts of the figure,
whereas older children began to represent the figure
as a configural whole. It is around age six that children
begin to show sensitivity to both individual features
of a figure and the overall configuration. Up until that
point, younger children tend to perform more accu-
rately when recalling the left side of the figure than
the right side (Karapetsas & Kantas, 1991; Waber &
Holmes, 1985).
595
Few studies have established normative data for
the ROCF with Spanish-speaking pediatric popula-
tions. Although normative data exists for Colombian
(Ardila & Rosselli, 1994) and Mexican (Galindo &
Cortes, 2003) pediatric populations, no comprehen-
sive normative data exists for pediatric populations in
many other Spanish-speaking countries. The present
study sought to fill this gap in the literature by pro-
viding normative data for a population of children
and adolescents from Latin American countries and
Spain based on multiple linear regression analyses.
2. Method
2.1. Participants
The sample consisted of 4,373 healthy children
who were recruited from Chile, Cuba, Ecuador,
Guatemala, Honduras, Mexico, Paraguay, Peru,
Puerto Rico, and Spain. Participants were selected
according to the following criteria: a) between 6 and
17 years of age, b) born and currently lived in a coun-
try where the study was conducted, c) Spanish as
primary language, d) an IQ ≥80 on the Test Of Non-
verbal Intelligence (TONI-2; Brown, Sherbenou, &
Johnsen, 2009), and e) a scored <19 on the Children’s
Depression Inventory (CDI; Kovacs, 1992).
Children with history of neurologic or psychiatric
disorders as reported by the participant’s parent(s)
were excluded due to its effects on cognitive perfor-
mance. Participants in the study were from public or
private schools, and they signed an informed consent
to participate. Socio-demographic and participant
characteristics for each of the countries’ samples have
been reported elsewhere (Rivera & Arango-Lasprilla,
2017). Ethics Committee approval was obtained for
the study in each country.
2.2. Instrument administration
A trained examiner administered the ROCF Figure
A (copy), and after 3 minutes, the immediate recall
was given. To score the ROCF figure, the Spanish-
language ROCF manual was used (Rey, 2009). The
ROCF includes 18 elements, and the maximum score
for each of the two tasks (copy and immediate recall)
is 36. In terms of scoring, two points are given when
the element is correctly reproduced; one point is
given when the reproduction is either (a) distorted,
(b) incomplete but placed properly, or (c) complete
but placed poorly; and 0.5 point is credited when the
596 J.C. Arango-Lasprilla et al. / Rey–Osterrieth Complex Figure Test
element is distorted or incomplete and placed poorly.
A score of 0 is given when the element is absent or is
not recognizable (Osterrieth, 1944).
2.3. Statistical analyses
Detailed statistical analyses used to generate the
normative data for the ROCF copy and immediate
recall (3 minutes) scores are described in Rivera and
Arango-Lasprilla (2017). In summary, the scores
were standardized using multiple linear regression
analyses by means of a four-step procedure. 1) First,
the ROCF copy and immediate recall test scores were
computed separately by means of the final multiple
regression models. The full regression models
included the following as predictors: age, age2 , sex,
and mean level of parental education (MLPE). Age
was centered (= calendar age – mean age in the
sample by country) before computing the quadratic
age term to avoid multicollinearity (Aiken & West,
1991). Sex was coded as male = 1 and female = 0.
The MLPE variable was coded as 1 if the partici-
pant’s parent(s) had >12 years of education or 0 if
participant’s parent(s) had ≤12 years of education. If
predicted variables were not statistically significant
in the multivariate model with an alpha of 0.05,
the non-significant variables were removed and the
model was run again. A final regression model was
conducted ŷi = B0 + B1 · Age − x̄Age by country i +
 2
B2 · Age − x̄Age by country + B3 · Sexi + B4 · MLPEi .
i
2) Residual scores were calculated based on the
final model (ei = yi − ŷi ). 3) Residuals were
standardized using the residual Standard Deviation
(SDe ) value provided by the regression model:
z i = e i /SDe . 4) Standardized residuals were con-
verted to percentile values using the standard normal
cumulative distribution function. This four-step
process was applied for ROCF copy and imme-
diate recall (3 minutes) scores separately for each
country.
For all multiple linear regression models, the
following assumptions were evaluated: a) multi-
collinearity by the values of the Variance Inflation
Factor (VIF), which must not exceed 10, and
the collinearity tolerance values, which must not
exceed the value of 1 (Kutner, Nachtsheim, Neter,
& Li, 2005) and b) the existence of influential
values by calculating the Cook’s distance. The
maximum Cook’s distance value was related to
a F (p, n − p) distribution. Influential values are
considered when percentile value is equal or higher
than 50 (Cook, 1977; Kutner et al., 2005). All ana-
lyzes were performed using SPSS version 23 (IBM
Corp., Armonk, NY).
3. Results
3.1. ROCF copy
The final multivariate linear regression models for
the ten country-specific ROCF copy scores were sig-
nificant (see Table 1). In all countries, the ROCF
copy scores increased linearly as a function of age.
The ROCF copy scores for all countries except for
Puerto Rico were affected by a quadratic age effect.
Children from Chile, Puerto Rico, and Spain whose
parent(s) had a MLPE >12 years obtained higher
ROCF copy scores than children whose parent(s) had
an MLPE ≤12 years. The child’s sex affected their
ROCF copy scores in Chile and Puerto Rico, such that
girls scored higher than boys. The amount of vari-
ance these predictors explained in the ROCF copy
scores ranged from 25.5% (in Guatemala) to 63.6%
(in Cuba).
3.2. ROCF immediate recall (3 minutes)
The final multivariate linear regression models
for the ten country-specific ROCF immediate recall
scores were significant (see Table 2). In all countries,
the ROCF immediate recall score increased linearly
as a function of age. The ROCF immediate recall
scores were affected by a quadratic age effect for
all countries except, Chile, Guatemala, Honduras,
Paraguay, and Puerto Rico. Children from Paraguay
and Spain whose parent(s) had a MLPE >12 years
obtained higher ROCF immediate recall scores than
children whose parent(s) had a MLPE ≤12 years.
The child’s sex affected ROCF immediate recall score
for Chile and Puerto Rico, such that girls scored
higher than boys. The amount of variance these
predictors explained in the ROCF immediate recall
scores ranged from 24.8% (in Ecuador) to 53.4%
(in Cuba).
The assumptions of multiple linear regression anal-
ysis were met for all final models. There was not
multicollinearity (the VIF values were below 10; VIF
≤1.097; collinearity tolerance values did not exceed
the value of 1) or influential cases (the maximum
Cook’s distance value was 0.080 in a F(2,201) distri-
bution which correspond to percentile 6).
 J.C. Arango-Lasprilla et al. / Rey–Osterrieth Complex Figure Test 597

Table 1
Final multiple linear regression models for ROCF copy
Country B Std. Error t Sig. R2 SDe (residual)
Chile
Constant 24.574 0.533 46.086 <0.001 0.520 5.447
Age 1.586 0.082 19.336 <0.001
Age2 –0.128 0.027 –4.774 <0.001
MLPE 1.467 0.601 2.439 0.015
Sex –1.695 0.569 –2.978 0.003
Cuba
Constant 33.332 0.287 116.031 <0.001 0.636 3.701
Age 1.301 0.055 23.632 <0.001
Age2 –0.180 0.018 –9.936 <0.001
Ecuador
Constant 29.245 0.503 58.176 <0.001 0.308 5.735
Age 1.071 0.096 11.115 <0.001
Age2 –0.121 0.032 –3.794 <0.001
Guatemala
Constant 31.112 0.481 64.648 <0.001 0.255 5.395
Age 1.300 0.159 8.161 <0.001
Age2 –0.161 0.046 –3.489 0.001
Honduras
Constant 29.267 0.429 68.253 <0.001 0.464 5.066
Age 1.455 0.093 15.666 <0.001
Age2 –0.152 0.030 –5.130 <0.001
Mexico
Constant 30.042 0.322 93.240 <0.001 0.326 6.473
Age 1.194 0.061 19.541 <0.001
Age2 –0.170 0.020 –8.449 <0.001
Paraguay
Constant 29.043 0.572 50.789 <0.001 0.380 6.367
Age 1.327 0.106 12.547 <0.001
Age2 –0.185 0.036 –5.140 <0.001
Peru
Constant 32.804 0.430 76.276 <0.001 0.346 5.299
Age 0.951 0.088 10.756 <0.001
Age2 –0.153 0.029 –5.261 <0.001
Puerto Rico
Constant 27.567 0.917 30.077 <0.001 0.443 5.988
Age 1.445 0.124 11.646 <0.001
MLPE 2.049 0.989 2.071 0.040
Sex –4.030 0.887 –4.542 <0.001
Spain
Constant 32.684 0.296 110.437 <0.001 0.487 4.622
Age 1.232 0.044 27.759 <0.001
Age2 –0.197 0.014 –13.765 <0.001
MLPE 1.578 0.309 5.105 <0.001
Note. MLPE: Mean level of parental education.

3.3. Normative procedure whose parent(s) have a mean of 14 years of educa-

Norms (e.g., a percentile score) for the different
ROCF copy or immediate recall scores by coun-
try were established using the four-step procedure
described in the statistical analysis section. An exam-
ple will be provided to facilitate the understanding of
the procedure used to obtain the percentile associ-
ated with a score on this test. To find the percentile
score for a 12-year-old Chilean boy who scored a 21
on the ROCF immediate recall (3 minutes) test and
tion (MLPE). The steps to obtain the percentile for
this score are: 1) Find Chile in Table 2, which pro-
vides the final regression models by country for the
ROCF immediate recall score. Use the B weights to
create an equation that will allow you to obtain the
predicted ROCF immediate recall score for this child
using the coding provided in the statistical analysis
section. The corresponding B weights are multiplied
by the centered age (= calendar age – mean age in
the Chilean sample, which is equal to 11.5 years),
598 J.C. Arango-Lasprilla et al. / Rey–Osterrieth Complex Figure Test

Table 2
Final multiple linear regression models for ROCF immediate recall (3 minutes)
Country B Std. Error t Sig. R2 SDe (residual)
Chile
Constant 14.300 0.399 35.883 <0.001 0.491 5.507
Age 1.550 0.082 18.911 <0.001
Sex –1.205 0.567 –2.125 0.034
Cuba
Constant 24.147 0.525 46.009 <0.001 0.534 6.724
Age 2.105 0.103 20.343 <0.001
Age2 –0.144 0.034 –4.227 <0.001
Ecuador
Constant 18.517 0.604 30.670 <0.001 0.248 6.889
Age 1.126 0.116 9.729 <0.001
Age2 –0.102 0.038 –2.671 0.008
Guatemala
Constant 18.731 0.427 43.890 <0.001 0.287 6.036
Age 1.520 0.170 8.957 <0.001
Honduras
Constant 16.603 0.333 49.917 <0.001 0.415 5.702
Age 1.486 0.103 14.424 <0.001
Mexico
Constant 18.550 0.336 55.193 <0.001 0.312 6.745
Age 1.267 0.064 19.871 <0.001
Age2 –0.111 0.021 –5.284 <0.001
Paraguay
Constant 16.247 0.616 26.356 <0.001 0.325 6.354
Age 1.210 0.106 11.406 <0.001
MLPE 2.348 0.771 3.046 0.003
Peru
Constant 21.466 0.558 38.445 <0.001 0.414 6.848
Age 1.555 0.114 13.602 <0.001
Age2 –0.149 0.038 –3.960 <0.001
Puerto Rico
Constant 18.346 0.637 28.814 <0.001 0.352 6.576
Age 1.247 0.131 9.482 <0.001
Sex –4.558 0.934 –4.878 <0.001
Spain
Constant 19.893 0.414 48.108 <0.001 0.412 6.457
Age 1.573 0.062 25.306 <0.001
Age2 –0.127 0.020 –6.329 <0.001
MLPE 2.501 0.432 5.785 <0.001
Note. MLPE: Mean level of parental education.

and sex, which was coded as male = 1 and female = 0.
Age2 and MLPE were not significant predictors, and
therefore are not included in this model. See Rivera
and Arango-Lasprilla (2017) to figure out the mean
age of each country’s sample. Finally, the result is
added to the constant generated by the model in order
to calculate the predicted value.
In the case of the Chilean boy, the predicted
ROCF immediate recall score would be calcu-
lated using the following equation: ŷi = 14.300 +
1.550 · (Agei − 11.5) + (−1.205 · Sexi ) The
boy’s age is 12. The MLPE (14 years) is split into
either 1 to 12 years (and assigned a 0) or more than
12 years (and assigned a 1) in the model, but since
MLPE was not a significant predictor in this case, is
not included in the model. Sex was coded as male = 1
and female = 0, so in this case as the child is a male,
the sex value is 1. Thus, the predicted value equation
is: ŷi = 14.300 + [1.550 · (12–11.5)] + (–1.205 · 1) =
14.300 + 0.775 – 1.205 = 13.870. 2) In order to cal-
culate the residual value (indicated with an ei in the
equation), we subtract the actual ROCF immediate
recall test score (he scored 21) from the predicted
value we just calculated (ei = yi − ŷi ). In this case,
it would be ei = 21 − 13.870 = 7.130. 3) Next,
consult the SDe column in Table 2 to obtain the
country-specific SDe (residual) value. For Chile, it is
5.507. Using this value, we can transform the resid-
ual value to a standardized z score using the equation
(zi = ei /SDe ). In this case, we have 7.130/5.507 =
1.295. This is the standardized z score for a 12-
year-old Chilean boy who scored a 21 on the ROCF
 J.C. Arango-Lasprilla et al. / Rey–Osterrieth Complex Figure Test
immediate recall who has parent(s) with 14 years
of education (MLPE). 4) The last step is to use the
tables available in most statistical reference books
(e.g., Strauss, Sherman, & Spreen, 2006) to con-
vert z scores to percentiles. In this example, the
z score (probability) of 1.295 corresponds to the
90th percentile. It is important to remember to use
the appropriate tables that correspond to each test
(copy vs. immediate recall) when performing these
calculations.
3.4. User-friendly normative data
The four-step normative procedures explained
above offers the clinician the ability to determine an
exact percentile for a child who has a specific score
on the ROCF copy or immediate recall test. However,
this method can be prone to human error due to the
number of hand calculations necessary. To enhance
user-friendliness, the authors have completed these
steps for a range of raw scores based on age, sex,
and MLPE and created tables for clinicians to more
easily obtain a percentile range/estimate associated
with a given raw score on this test. These tables are
available by country and type of test in the Appendix.
In order to obtain an approximate percentile for the
above example (converting a raw score of 21 on
the ROCF immediate recall test for a Chilean boy
who is 12 years old whose parent(s) have 14 years
of education) using the simplified normative tables
provided in the Appendix, the following steps must
be followed. (1) First, identify the appropriate table
ensuring the appropriate country and test (copy vs.
immediate recall). In this case, the table for the ROCF
immediate recall score for boys from Chile can be
found in Table A13. (2) Find the appropriate age of
the child, in this case, 12 years old. (3) Next, look
in the 12 years’ age column to find the approximate
location of the raw score obtained on the test. Within
the 12 years’ column, the score of 21 obtained by
this Chilean boy corresponds to an approximate per-
centile of 90.
The percentile obtained using this user-friendly
table sometimes could be slightly different than the
hand-calculated, more accurate method because the
user-friendly table is based on a limited number of
percentile values. Individual percentiles cannot be
presented in these tables due to space limitations.
If the exact score is not listed in the column, you
must estimate the percentile value from the list of
raw scores available.
599
4. Discussion
The ROCF is one of the most widely used
neuropsychological tests in the world to evaluate
visuospatial, visual-motor, and visual memory pro-
cesses in both children and adults (Frisk et al.,
2005). In Latin American countries and in Spain,
this test is among the 10 most utilized neu-
ropsychological tests by clinical neuropsychologists
during their professional practice (Arango-Lasprilla,
Stevens, Morlett-Paredes, Ardila, & Rivera, 2016;
Olabarrieta-Landa et al., 2016). However, in spite of
its great use, there are currently very few studies on
validation and standardization of this test for Spanish-
speakers. The vast majority of the studies have been
done with adult populations, and to date very few
studies have been conducted with pediatric popula-
tions. Therefore, neuropsychologists who use this test
in Latin American countries or in Spain with pedi-
atric populations usually perform their interpretation
using norms from other countries (Arango-Lasprilla
et al., 2016). Thus, there was an overwhelming need
for normative data of the ROCF for pediatric popu-
lations in both Latin American countries and Spain
(Arango-Lasprilla et al., 2016; Olabarrieta-Landa
et al., 2016).
To fill this gap in the literature, the purpose of this
study was to obtain normative data for the ROCF
copy and immediate recall (3 minutes) scores for
children and adolescents from nine Latin American
countries (Chile, Cuba, Ecuador, Guatemala, Hon-
duras, México, Paraguay, Peru, and Puerto Rico) and
Spain. The results of the study showed that there are
different types of variables associated with the perfor-
mance of the test such as age, quadratic age, sex, and
MLPE. In general, it was found that the final regres-
sion models explained between 25.5% and 63.6% of
the variance for the ROCF copy, and between 24.8%
and 53.4% of the variance for the ROCF immediate
recall.
Age was significantly related to the total score
of both the ROCF copy and the ROCF immedi-
ate recall, so that the scores increase linearly as
children become older. These results are similar to
those reported in other studies in which ROCF scores
were found to increase significantly with age (Frisk
et al., 2005; Meyers & Meyers, 1996). Additionally,
a curvilinear effect of age on the ROCF copy was
shown in all countries, except Puerto Rico. Scores
increased prominently between ages 6 and 13, while
that increase slowly decreased after the ages 13–14
approximately, to later stabilize and resemble that of
600 J.C. Arango-Lasprilla et al. / Rey–Osterrieth Complex Figure Test
adults. Other studies, however, have found that the
increase in scores begins to occur mainly between
the ages of 12 and 16, being at age 17 when perfor-
mance is matched to that of adults (Meyers & Meyers,
1996).
A curvilinear effect was also observed for the
ROCF immediate recall for all countries, except for
Chile, Guatemala, Honduras, Paraguay, and Puerto
Rico. Score increased prominently between the ages
6 and 15, followed by a smaller increase between
the ages 16 and 17 years of age. Past research has
found that for the ROCF immediate and delay recall,
there is a large increase in scores between the ages
6 to 12 followed by smaller increases between the
ages of 12 and 17 (Anderson & Lajoie, 1996; Boone,
Lesser, Hill-Gutierrez, Berman, & D’elia, 1993; Caf-
farra, Vezzadini, Dieci, Zonato, & Venneri, 2002;
Chervinsky, Mitrushina, & Satz, 1992; Chiulli, Haa-
land, Larue, & Garry, 1995; Denman, 1984; Hartman
& Potter, 1998; Kramer & Wells, 2004; Meyers &
Meyers, 1995, 1996; Miatton, Wolters, Lannoo, &
Vingerhoets, 2004; Pontón et al., 1996; Van Gorp,
Satz, & Mitrushina, 1990).
On the other hand, the results of the present study
contradict those found by Beltrán Dulcey and Solı́s-
Uribe (2012). In their study, the ROCF copy and the
ROCF immediate recall scores were not associated
with age. One possible explanation might be the small
sample size (141 children) used. Another potential
explanation is that Beltrán Dulcey and Solı́s-Uribe
(2012) divided the sample into two age ranges (9 to
12 years and 13 to 16) to compare the performance
of these two groups using an independent measures
t-test. In the present study, the variable age was ana-
lyzed as a continuous variable, and the sample sizes
were symmetrical for each age. Subsequently, the
effect of age on each test score was calculated by
multiple linear regressions.
Sex was not associated with the test performance
neither for the ROCF copy nor for the ROCF imme-
diate recall in the vast majority of countries. These
results are similar to those reported in other studies in
which sex was not found to be associated with the per-
formance of this test (Beltrán Dulcey & Solı́s-Uribe,
2012; Poulton, & Moffitt, 1995). However, sex was
associated with copy and immediate recall scores in
Chile and Puerto Rico, such that Chilean and Puerto
Rican girls scored better than boys.
Despite the little attention paid to parents’
education levels in the standardization of neuropsy-
chological tests for pediatric populations, research
supports parents’ level of education as influential
in children’s development of the cognitive functions
(Schady, 2011). In this study, parents’ MLPE was
associated with ROCF copy scores in Chile, Puerto
Rico and Spain and with ROCF immediate recall
scores in Paraguay and Spain. In both cases, children
whose parent(s) had more than 12 years of educa-
tion scored significantly higher than children whose
parent(s) had an education below 12 years.
The results of the present study have notable clini-
cal implications. Established norms for the ROCF for
ten Spanish-speaking countries provide an excellent
opportunity for clinical neuropsychologists to use this
test as part of their neuropsychological evaluation
protocols with the objective to evaluate alterations in
visuospatial, visual-motor, and visual memory pro-
cesses in pediatric populations between 6 and 17
years of age. Using these norms, the performance
of each child can be assessed in a more exact and
standardized manner according to their age, gender,
and the education of their parent(s). The creation of
standardized norms will improve neuropsychological
evaluation and diagnosis both in normal and clini-
cal populations, since deficits are usually present in
children with learning disabilities (Kirkwood, Weiler,
Bernstein, Forbes, & Waber, 2001), brain injury
(Verger et al., 2000), autism (Czermainski, Riesgo,
Guimarães, Salles, & Bosa, 2014), and attention and
hyperactivity disorder (Rizzutti et al., 2008), among
others. Furthermore, norms to value the neuropsy-
chological performance of children with impairments
will inform their prognostic course and facilitate the
implementation of cognitive rehabilitation programs
among populations who may benefit.
4.1. Limitations
Despite the strengths of the present study in fill-
ing a gap in the literature and providing the largest
sample to validate and standardize the ROCF with
Spanish-speaking populations, the results of the study
should be interpreted in light of several limitations.
This study presents normative data of the ROCF for
nine countries in Latin America and Spain. For this
reason, it is not advisable to use these norms to assess
pediatric populations in Spanish-speaking countries
not included in the present study. Future research
should be conducted to standardize the ROCF in other
Spanish-speaking countries.
Although the norms generated by the present study
could be used by neuropsychologists in other coun-
tries to evaluate Spanish speaking immigrant children
from any of the nine Latin American countries or
 J.C. Arango-Lasprilla et al. / Rey–Osterrieth Complex Figure Test
Spain included in our sample, we caution this use
due to the potential influence of other variables not
assessed in the present study, such as level of accul-
turation, bilingualism, and number of years living
in the country. In addition, the quality of educa-
tion of both the child and the parent(s) is another
aspect that may influence the cognitive performance
of children.
The ROCF is one of the most used instruments in
the world to measure visuospatial, visual-motor, and
visual memory problems. However, it is essential to
consider that no clinical diagnosis should be made
based solely on the scores of this test. Scores should
be integrated and interpreted as one part of a much
larger battery that evaluates these processes in greater
detail. Because there are a limited number of tests and
norms in Latin America and Spain to evaluate these
processes, standardization efforts should be made in
future research for other similar assessments.
Although the size of the sample was adequate
in each of the countries where the study was con-
ducted, it is important to note that only the samples
in Chile, Mexico, Paraguay, Puerto Rico, and Spain
were obtained from several regions of the countries,
whereas in the remaining countries the samples were
collected from one geographical area. Future studies
should expand data collection to other geographical
areas of these countries to improve representativeness
and generalizability.
Spanish was the first language for the children
who participated in the present study. Despite Span-
ish being the first language for the majority of the
population in Latin America and Spain, it is impor-
tant to consider the cultural and linguistic richness
of these countries. For example, the first language
of many children may be completely different from
Spanish (e.g., Portuguese, Euskera, Catalan, Guaranı́,
Maya, Quechua). For this reason, caution should be
used when using these norms in children whose first
language is not Spanish.
Finally, participants in the present study all rep-
resent a normal, healthy population. Future studies
should be performed with clinical populations to
establish the sensitivity and specificity of this test.
5. Conclusions
The ROCF is one of the most widely used
neuropsychological tests for evaluating visuospa-
tial, visual-motor, and visual memory processes
in children and adolescents in Latin America and
601
Spain. Present study findings established standard-
ized norms for ten countries, and results indicated
that age, sex, and parental education level influence
ROCF scores. These variables ought to be taken into
account when interpreting children’s scores. These
norms provide neuropsychologists in these countries
a valid assessment tool that can be used in everyday
practice with pediatric populations.
Conflict of interest
None to report.
Supplementary material
The Appendix tables are available in the electronic
version of this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.3233/
NRE-172241.
References
Aiken, L. S., & West, S. G. (1991). Multiple regression: Testing
and interpreting interactions. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Akshoomoff, N. A., Feroleto, C. C., Doyle, R. E., & Stiles, J.
(2002). The impact of early unilateral brain injury on percep-
tual organization and visual memory. Neuropsychologia, 40(5),
539-561. doi: 10.1016/s0028-3932(01)00129-4.
Anderson, V. A., & Lajoie, G. (1996). Development of memory and
learning skills in school-aged children: A neuropsychological
perspective. Applied Neuropsychology, 3(3-4), 128-139.
Arango-Lasprilla, J. C., Stevens, L., Morlett Paredes, A., Ardila,
A., & Rivera, D. (2016). Profession of neuropsychology in
Latin America. Applied Neuropsychology: Adult, 24(4), 318-
330. doi: 10.1080/23279095.2016.1185423.
Ardila, A., & Rosselli, M. (1994). Development of language, mem-
ory, and visuospatial abilities in 5- to 12-year-old children
using a neuropsychological battery. Developmental Neuropsy-
chology, 10(2), 97-120. doi: 10.1080/87565649409540571.
Beltrán Dulcey, C., & Solı́s Uribe, G. (2012). Evaluación neu-
ropsicológica en adolescentes: Normas para población de
Bucaramanga. Revista Neuropsicologı́a, Neuropsiquiatrı́a y
Neurociencias, 12(2), 77-93.
Boone, K. B., Lesser, I. M., Hill-Gutierrez, E., Berman, N.
G., & D’elia, L. F. (1993). Rey-Osterrieth Complex Figure
performance in healthy, older adults: Relationship to age, edu-
cation, sex, and IQ. The Clinical Neuropsychologist, 7(1),
22-28.
Brown, L., Sherbenou, R. J, & Johnsen, S. K. (2009). Test de
inteligencia no verbal TONI-2. Madrid: TEA ediciones.
Caffarra, P., Vezzadini, G., Dieci, F., Zonato, F., & Venneri, A.
(2002). Rey-Osterrieth complex figure: Normative values in
an Italian population sample. Neurological Sciences, 22(6),
443-447.
602 J.C. Arango-Lasprilla et al. / Rey–Osterrieth Complex Figure Test
Chervinsky, A. B., Mitrushina, M., & Satz, P. (1992). Comparison
of four methods of scoring the Rey-Osterrieth Complex Fig-
ure Drawing Test on four age groups of normal elderly. Brain
Dysfunction, 55(5), 267-287.
Chiulli, S. J., Haaland, K. Y., Larue, A., & Garry, P. J. (1995).
Impact of age on drawing the Rey-Osterrieth Figure. The Clin-
ical Neuropsychologist, 9(3), 219-224.
Cook, R. D. (1977). Detection of influential observation in lin-
ear regression. Technometrics, 19(1), 15-18. doi: 10.2307/126
8249.
Czermainski, F. R., Riesgo, R. D. S., Guimarães, L. S. P., Salles, J.
F. D., & Bosa, C. A. (2014). Executive functions in children and
adolescents with autism spectrum disorder. Paidéia (Ribeirão
Preto), 24(57), 85-94.
De Leeuw, C. E. (2010). Adjusting Rey Osterrieth Complex Figure
Test recall performance for copy integrity (Doctoral disser-
tation). Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses
database. (UMI Number: 3485983).
Demsky, Y., Carone Jr, D. A., Burns, W. J., & Sellers, A. (2000).
Assessment of visual-motor coordination in 6-to 11-yr.-olds.
Perceptual and Motor Skills, 91(1), 311-321. doi: 10.2466/
pms.2000.91.1.311.
Denman, S. (1984). Denman Neuropsychology Memory Scale: A
Clinical Assessment of Immediate Recall, Short Term Mem-
ory and Long Term Memory in Verbal and Nonverbal Areas.
Charleston, SC: Sydney B. Denman.
Fastenau, P. S. (1996). Development and preliminary standardiza-
tion of the “Extended Complex Figure Test” (ECFT). Journal
of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology, 18(1), 63-76.
doi: 10.1080/01688639608408263.
Frisk, V., Jakobson, L. S., Knight, R. M., & Robertson, B. (2005).
Copy and recall performance of 6–8-year-old children after
standard vs. step-by-step administration of the Rey-Osterrieth
Complex Figure. Child Neuropsychology, 11(2), 135-152. doi:
10.1080/092970490911289.
Galindo, G., & Cortes, J. F. (2003). The ROCF and the complex
figure for children in Spanish speaking populations. In J. A.
Knight & E. Kaplan (Eds.), The handbook of Rey-Osterrieth
complex figure usage: Clinical and research applications.
Lutz, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources.
Hartman, M., & Potter, G. (1998). Sources of age differences on
the Rey-Osterrieth complex figure test. The Clinical Neuropsy-
chologist, 12(4), 513-524.
Hooper, H. E. (1983). Hooper Visual Organization Test (HVOT).
Los Angeles, CA, United States: Western Psychological
Services.
Karapetsas, A. B, & Kantas, A. (1991). Visuomotor organization
in the child: A neuropsychological approach. Perceptual and
Motor Skills, 72, 211-217.
Kasai, M., Meguro, K., Hashimoto, R., Ishizaki, J., Yamadori, A.,
& Mori, E. (2006). Non-verbal learning is impaired in very
mild Alzheimer’s disease (CDR 0.5): Normative data from the
learning version of the Rey–Osterrieth Complex Figure Test.
Psychiatry and Clinical Neurosciences, 60(2), 139-146. doi:
10.1111/j.1440-1819.2006.01478.x.
Kirkwood, M. W., Weiler, M. D., Bernstein, J. H., Forbes, J. H., &
Waber, D. P. (2001). Sources of poor performance on the Rey-
Osterrieth Complex Figure Test among children with learning
difficulties: A dynamic assessment approach. Clinical Neu-
ropsychology, 15(3), 345-350.
Kolb, B., & Whishaw, I. Q. (1985). Earlier is not always better:
Behavioral dysfunction and abnormal cerebral morphogene-
sis following neonatal cortical lesions in the rat. Behavioural
Brain Research, 17(1), 25-43.
Kovacs, M. (1992). Children’s depression inventory. North
Tonawanda, NY: Multi-Health System.
Kramer, J. H., & Wells, A. M. (2004). The role of perceptual bias
in complex figure recall. Journal of Clinical and Experimental
Neuropsychology, 26(6), 838-845.
Kutner, M. H., Nachtsheim, C. J., Neter, J., & Li, W. (2005).
Applied linear statistical models (5th ed.). New York: McGraw
Hill.
Matthews, C. G, & Kløve, H. (1964). Instruction Manual for
the Adult Neuropsychology Test Battery. Madison, WI, United
States: University of Wisconsin Medical School.
Meyers, J. E., & Meyers, K. R. (1995). Rey Complex Figure
Test and recognition trial professional manual. Psychological
Assessment Resources.
Meyers, J. E., & Meyers, K. R. (1996). Rey Complex Figure
Test and recognition trial: Professional manual, supplemental
norms for children and adolescents. Lutz, FL, United States:
Psychological Assessment Resources, Inc.
Miatton M., Wolters M., Lannoo E, & Vingerhoets G. (2004).
Updated and extended Flemish normative data of commonly
used neuropsychological tests. Psychologica Belgica 44, 189-
216.
Mitrushina, M., Boone, K. B., Razani, J., & D’Elia, L. F.
(2005). Handbook of normative data for neuropsychological
assessment (2nd ed.). New York, NY, United States: Oxford
University Press.
Olabarrieta-Landa, L, Caracuel, A., Pérez-Garcı́a, M., Panyavin,
I., Morlett-Paredes, A., & Arango-Lasprilla, J. C. (2016). The
profession of neuropsychology in Spain: Results of a national
survey. Clinical Neuropsychology, 30(8), 1335-1355.
Osterrieth, P. A. (1944). Le test de copie d’une figure complexe.
Arch Psychol, 30, 206-356.
Pontón, M. O., Satz, P., Herrera, L., Ortiz, F., Urrutia, C. P.,
Young, R., ... & Namerow, N. (1996). Normative data stratified
by age and education for the Neuropsychological Screening
Battery for Hispanics (NeSBHIS): Initial report. Jour-
nal of the International Neuropsychological Society, 2(02),
96-104.
Poulton, R. G., & Moffitt, T. E. (1995). The Rey-Osterreith
Complex Figure Test: Norms for young adolescents and an
examination of validity. Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology,
10(1), 47-56.
Rey, A. (1941). L’examen psychologique dans les cas
d’encephalopathie traumatique [The psychological exami-
nation of cases of traumatic encephalopathy]. Archives de
Psychologie, 37, 126-139.
Rey, A. (2009). REY: Test de copia y de reproducción de memoria
de figuras geométricas complejas. Madrid: TEA ediciones.
Rivera, D., & Arango-Lasprilla, J. C. (2017). Methodology for the
development of normative data for Spanish Speaking pediatric
population. NeuroRehabilitation, 41(3), 581-592.
Rizzutti, S., Sinnes, E. G., Scaramuzza, L. F., Freitas, L., Pinheiro,
D., Palma, S. M., ... & Muszkat, M. (2008). Clinical and neu-
ropsychological profile in a sample of children with attention
deficit hyperactivity disorders. Arquivos de neuro-psiquiatria,
66(4), 821-827.
Rosselli, M., & Ardila, A. (1991). Effects of age, education, and
gender on the Rey-Osterrieth Complex Figure. The Clinical
Neuropsychologist, 5(4), 370-376. doi: 10.1080/13854049108
404104.
 J.C. Arango-Lasprilla et al. / Rey–Osterrieth Complex Figure Test
Schady, N. (2011). Parents’ education, mothers’ vocabulary, and
cognitive development in early childhood: Longitudinal evi-
dence from Ecuador. American Journal of Public Health,
101(12), 2299-2307.
Shin, M. S., Park, S. Y., Park, S. R., Seol, S. H., & Kwon,
J. S. (2006). Clinical and empirical applications of the
Rey-Osterrieth complex figure test. Nature Protocols, 1(2),
892-899. doi: 10.1038/nprot.2006.115.
Strauss, E., Sherman, E. M., & Spreen, O. (2006). A compendium
of neuropsychological tests: Administration, norms, and com-
mentary. American Chemical Society.
Van Gorp, W. G., Satz, P., & Mitrushina, M. (1990). Neuropsycho-
logical processes associated with normal aging. Developmental
Neuropsychology, 6(4), 279-290.
Verger, K., Junqué, C., Jurado, M. A., Tresserras, P., Bartumeus,
F., Nogues, P., & Poch, J. M. (2000). Age effects on long-
term neuropsychological outcome in paediatric traumatic brain
injury. Brain Injury, 14(6), 495-503.
Waber, D. P., & Bernstein, J. H. (1995). Performance of
learning-disabled and non-learning-disabled children on the
603
Rey-Osterrieth Complex Figure: Validation of the devel-
opmental scoring system. Developmental Neuropsychology,
11(2), 237-252. doi: 10.1080/87565649509540616.
Waber, D. P., & Holmes, J. M. (1985). Assessing children’s copy
productions of the Rey-Osterrieth Complex Figure. Journal of
Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology, 7(3), 264-280.
doi: 10.1080/01688638508401259.
Waber, D. P., & Holmes, J. M. (1986). Assessing children’s mem-
ory productions of the Rey-Osterrieth Complex Figure. Journal
of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology, 8(5), 563-580.
doi: 10.1080/01688638608405176.
Watanabe, K., Ogino, T., Nakano, K., Hattori, J., Kado, Y.,
Sanada, S., & Ohtsuka, Y. (2005). The Rey–Osterrieth Com-
plex Figure as a measure of executive function in childhood.
Brain and Development, 27(8), 564-569. doi: 10.1016/j.brain
dev.2005.02.007.
Wechsler, D. (1989). Wechsler Preschool and Primary Scale
of Intelligence-Revised. Toronto, Ontario, Canada: Harcourt
Brace Jovanovich, Inc.
Rey–Osterrieth Complex Figure – copy and immediate
recall (3 minutes): Normative data for Spanish-
speaking pediatric populations

Appendix tables

1
 J.C. Arango-Lasprilla et al. / Rey–Osterrieth Complex Figure Test

Table A1. Normative data for the ROCF copy stratified by age and MLPE for CHILE: BOYS
Age (Years)
Percentile
6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17
95 20.7 23.6 26.2 28.5 30.6 32.5 34.0 35.4 36.0 36.0 -- --
90 18.7 21.6 24.2 26.6 28.7 30.5 32.1 33.4 34.5 35.3 36.0 36.0
85 17.4 20.3 22.9 25.2 27.3 29.2 30.8 32.1 33.2 34.0 34.6 34.9
80 16.3 19.2 21.8 24.2 26.3 28.1 29.7 31.0 32.1 32.9 33.5 33.8
MLPE > 12 years

70 14.6 17.5 20.1 22.4 24.5 26.4 27.9 29.3 30.3 31.2 31.7 32.0
60 13.1 16.0 18.6 20.9 23.0 24.9 26.5 27.8 28.9 29.7 30.3 30.6
50 11.8 14.6 17.2 19.6 21.7 23.5 25.1 26.4 27.5 28.3 28.9 29.2
40 10.4 13.3 15.9 18.2 20.3 22.2 23.7 25.1 26.2 27.0 27.5 27.8
30 8.9 11.8 14.4 16.7 18.8 20.7 22.3 23.6 24.7 25.5 26.1 26.4
20 7.2 10.0 12.7 15.0 17.1 18.9 20.5 21.9 22.9 23.8 24.3 24.6
15 6.1 9.0 11.6 13.9 16.0 17.9 19.4 20.8 21.8 22.7 23.2 23.5
10 4.8 7.6 10.3 12.6 14.7 16.5 18.1 19.5 20.5 21.4 21.9 22.2
5 2.8 5.7 8.3 10.6 12.7 14.6 16.2 17.5 18.6 19.4 20.0 20.3

95 19.2 22.1 24.7 27.0 29.1 31.0 32.6 33.9 35.0 35.8 36.0 36.0
90 17.3 20.1 22.7 25.1 27.2 29.0 30.6 31.9 33.0 33.8 34.4 34.7
85 16.0 18.8 21.4 23.8 25.9 27.7 29.3 30.6 31.7 32.5 33.1 33.4
80 14.9 17.7 20.3 22.7 24.8 26.6 28.2 29.5 30.6 31.4 32.0 32.3
MLPE ≤ 12 years

70 13.1 16.0 18.6 20.9 23.0 24.9 26.5 27.8 28.9 29.7 30.3 30.6
60 11.6 14.5 17.1 19.5 21.6 23.4 25.0 26.3 27.4 28.2 28.8 29.1
50 10.3 13.2 15.8 18.1 20.2 22.1 23.6 25.0 26.0 26.9 27.4 27.7
40 8.9 11.8 14.4 16.8 18.8 20.7 22.3 23.6 24.7 25.5 26.1 26.4
30 7.5 10.3 12.9 15.3 17.4 19.2 20.8 22.1 23.2 24.0 24.6 24.9
20 5.7 8.6 11.2 13.5 15.6 17.5 19.1 20.4 21.5 22.3 22.9 23.2
15 4.6 7.5 10.1 12.4 14.5 16.4 18.0 19.3 20.4 21.2 21.8 22.1
10 3.3 6.2 8.8 11.1 13.2 15.1 16.7 18.0 19.1 19.9 20.5 20.8
5 1.4 4.2 6.8 9.2 11.3 13.1 14.7 16.0 17.1 17.9 18.5 18.8
Note. MLPE: Mean level of parental education
2
 J.C. Arango-Lasprilla et al. / Rey–Osterrieth Complex Figure Test 3

Table A2. Normative data for the ROCF copy stratified by age and MLPE for CHILE: GIRLS
Age (Years)
Percentile
6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17
95 22.4 25.2 27.9 30.2 32.3 34.1 35.7 36.0 -- -- -- --
90 20.4 23.3 25.9 28.2 30.3 32.2 33.8 35.1 36.0 -- -- --
85 19.1 22.0 24.6 26.9 29.0 30.9 32.5 33.8 34.9 36.0 36.0 36.0
80 18.0 20.9 23.5 25.9 27.9 29.8 31.4 32.7 33.8 34.6 35.2 35.5
MLPE > 12 years

70 16.3 19.1 21.8 24.1 26.2 28.0 29.6 31.0 32.0 32.9 33.4 33.7
60 14.8 17.7 20.3 22.6 24.7 26.6 28.2 29.5 30.6 31.4 32.0 32.3
50 13.4 16.3 18.9 21.3 23.4 25.2 26.8 28.1 29.2 30.0 30.6 30.9
40 12.1 15.0 17.6 19.9 22.0 23.9 25.4 26.8 27.8 28.7 29.2 29.5
30 10.6 13.5 16.1 18.4 20.5 22.4 24.0 25.3 26.4 27.2 27.8 28.1
20 8.9 11.7 14.3 16.7 18.8 20.6 22.2 23.6 24.6 25.5 26.0 26.3
15 7.8 10.6 13.3 15.6 17.7 19.6 21.1 22.5 23.5 24.4 24.9 25.2
10 6.5 9.3 12.0 14.3 16.4 18.2 19.8 21.2 22.2 23.1 23.6 23.9
5 4.5 7.4 10.0 12.3 14.4 16.3 17.9 19.2 20.3 21.1 21.7 22.0

95 20.9 23.8 26.4 28.7 30.8 32.7 34.3 35.6 36.0 -- -- --

90 19.0 21.8 24.4 26.8 28.9 30.7 32.3 33.6 34.7 36.0 36.0 36.0
85 17.6 20.5 23.1 25.5 27.6 29.4 31.0 32.3 33.4 34.2 34.8 35.1
80 16.6 19.4 22.0 24.4 26.5 28.3 29.9 31.2 32.3 33.1 33.7 34.0
MLPE ≤ 12 years

70 14.8 17.7 20.3 22.6 24.7 26.6 28.2 29.5 30.6 31.4 32.0 32.3
60 13.3 16.2 18.8 21.2 23.3 25.1 26.7 28.0 29.1 29.9 30.5 30.8
50 12.0 14.8 17.5 19.8 21.9 23.7 25.3 26.7 27.7 28.6 29.1 29.4
40 10.6 13.5 16.1 18.4 20.5 22.4 24.0 25.3 26.4 27.2 27.8 28.1
30 9.1 12.0 14.6 17.0 19.1 20.9 22.5 23.8 24.9 25.7 26.3 26.6
20 7.4 10.3 12.9 15.2 17.3 19.2 20.8 22.1 23.2 24.0 24.5 24.9
15 6.3 9.2 11.8 14.1 16.2 18.1 19.7 21.0 22.1 22.9 23.5 23.8
10 5.0 7.9 10.5 12.8 14.9 16.8 18.4 19.7 20.8 21.6 22.2 22.5
5 3.0 5.9 8.5 10.9 13.0 14.8 16.4 17.7 18.8 19.6 20.2 20.5
Note. MLPE: Mean level of parental education
 J.C. Arango-Lasprilla et al. / Rey–Osterrieth Complex Figure Test 4

Table A3. Normative data for the ROCF copy stratified by age for CUBA
Age (Years)
Percentile
6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17
95 26.8 29.9 32.6 35.0 36.0 -- -- -- -- -- -- --
90 25.5 28.6 31.3 33.7 35.7 -- -- -- -- -- -- --
85 24.6 27.7 30.4 32.8 34.8 36.0 -- -- -- -- -- --
80 23.9 26.9 29.7 32.1 34.1 35.7 -- -- -- -- -- --
70 22.7 25.8 28.5 30.9 32.9 34.6 36.0 36.0 -- -- -- --
60 21.7 24.8 27.5 29.9 31.9 33.6 34.9 35.8 36.0 36.0 36.0 36.0
50 20.7 23.8 26.6 29.0 31.0 32.6 33.9 34.9 35.5 35.7 35.6 35.1
40 19.8 22.9 25.7 28.0 30.1 31.7 33.0 34.0 34.5 34.8 34.6 34.1
30 18.8 21.9 24.7 27.0 29.1 30.7 32.0 33.0 33.5 33.8 33.6 33.1
20 17.6 20.7 23.5 25.8 27.9 29.5 30.8 31.8 32.4 32.6 32.4 32.0
15 16.9 20.0 22.7 25.1 27.1 28.8 30.1 31.0 31.6 31.8 31.7 31.2
10 16.0 19.1 21.8 24.2 26.2 27.9 29.2 30.1 30.7 31.0 30.8 30.3
5 14.7 17.8 20.5 22.9 24.9 26.6 27.9 28.8 29.4 29.6 29.5 29.0
 J.C. Arango-Lasprilla et al. / Rey–Osterrieth Complex Figure Test 5

Table A4. Normative data for the ROCF copy stratified by age for ECUADOR
Age (Years)
Percentile
6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17
95 29.3 31.6 33.6 35.4 36.0 -- -- -- -- -- -- --
90 27.3 29.5 31.5 33.3 34.8 36.0 -- -- -- -- -- --
85 25.9 28.2 30.2 31.9 33.5 34.8 36.0 -- -- -- -- --
80 24.8 27.0 29.0 30.8 32.3 33.6 34.7 36.0 36.0 36.0 36.0 36.0
70 22.9 25.2 27.2 29.0 30.5 31.8 32.8 33.6 34.2 34.5 34.6 34.4
60 21.4 23.6 25.6 27.4 28.9 30.2 31.3 32.1 32.6 33.0 33.0 32.9
50 19.9 22.2 24.2 26.0 27.5 28.8 29.8 30.6 31.2 31.5 31.6 31.5
40 18.5 20.8 22.8 24.5 26.1 27.4 28.4 29.2 29.8 30.1 30.2 30.0
30 17.0 19.2 21.2 23.0 24.5 25.8 26.9 27.7 28.2 28.6 28.6 28.5
20 15.1 17.4 19.4 21.2 22.7 24.0 25.0 25.8 26.4 26.7 26.8 26.6
15 14.0 16.2 18.2 20.0 21.5 22.8 23.9 24.7 25.2 25.6 25.6 25.5
10 12.6 14.9 16.9 18.6 20.2 21.5 22.5 23.3 23.9 24.2 24.3 24.1
5 10.5 12.8 14.8 16.6 18.1 19.4 20.4 21.2 21.8 22.1 22.2 22.0
 J.C. Arango-Lasprilla et al. / Rey–Osterrieth Complex Figure Test 6

Table A5. Normative data for the ROCF copy stratified by age for GUATEMALA
Age (Years)
Percentile
6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17
95 30.3 32.9 36.0 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
90 28.3 31.0 33.3 36.0 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
85 27.1 29.7 32.0 34.0 36.0 -- -- -- -- -- -- --
80 26.0 28.6 31.0 33.0 34.7 36.0 -- -- -- -- -- --
70 24.2 26.9 29.2 31.2 32.9 34.3 36.0 36.0 36.0 36.0 36.0 36.0
60 22.8 25.4 27.8 29.8 31.5 32.8 33.9 34.6 35.0 35.1 34.8 34.2
50 21.4 24.1 26.4 28.4 30.1 31.5 32.5 33.2 33.6 33.7 33.5 32.9
40 20.1 22.7 25.1 27.1 28.8 30.1 31.2 31.9 32.3 32.4 32.1 31.5
30 18.6 21.3 23.6 25.6 27.3 28.7 29.7 30.4 30.8 30.9 30.7 30.1
20 16.9 19.6 21.9 23.9 25.6 27.0 28.0 28.7 29.1 29.2 28.9 28.4
15 15.8 18.5 20.8 22.8 24.5 25.9 26.9 27.6 28.0 28.1 27.9 27.3
10 14.5 17.2 19.5 21.5 23.2 24.6 25.6 26.3 26.7 26.8 26.6 26.0
5 12.6 15.2 17.6 19.6 21.3 22.6 23.7 24.4 24.8 24.9 24.6 24.1
 J.C. Arango-Lasprilla et al. / Rey–Osterrieth Complex Figure Test 7

Table A6. Normative data for the ROCF copy stratified by age for HONDURAS
Age (Years)
Percentile
6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17
95 25.9 28.8 31.4 33.6 36.0 -- -- -- -- -- -- --
90 24.1 27.0 29.5 31.8 33.8 36.0 -- -- -- -- -- --
85 22.8 25.7 28.3 30.6 32.6 34.2 36.0 -- -- -- -- --
80 21.8 24.7 27.3 29.6 31.6 33.2 34.6 36.0 36.0 36.0 -- 36.0
70 20.2 23.1 25.7 28.0 29.9 31.6 33.0 34.0 34.8 35.2 36.0 35.2
60 18.8 21.7 24.3 26.6 28.6 30.2 31.6 32.7 33.4 33.9 34.0 33.8
50 17.6 20.5 23.1 25.3 27.3 29.0 30.3 31.4 32.1 32.6 32.7 32.6
40 16.3 19.2 21.8 24.1 26.0 27.7 29.1 30.1 30.9 31.3 31.5 31.3
30 14.9 17.8 20.4 22.7 24.7 26.3 27.7 28.8 29.5 30.0 30.1 29.9
20 13.3 16.2 18.8 21.1 23.0 24.7 26.1 27.1 27.9 28.3 28.5 28.3
15 12.3 15.2 17.8 20.1 22.0 23.7 25.1 26.1 26.9 27.3 27.5 27.3
10 11.1 14.0 16.6 18.8 20.8 22.5 23.8 24.9 25.7 26.1 26.3 26.1
5 9.3 12.2 14.7 17.0 19.0 20.7 22.0 23.1 23.8 24.3 24.4 24.3
 J.C. Arango-Lasprilla et al. / Rey–Osterrieth Complex Figure Test 8

Table A7. Normative data for the ROCF copy stratified by age for MEXICO
Age (Years)
Percentile
6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17
95 29.3 32.1 34.6 36.0 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
90 26.9 29.8 32.3 34.5 36.0 -- -- -- -- -- -- --
85 25.4 28.2 30.8 32.9 34.8 36.0 -- -- -- -- -- --
80 24.1 26.9 29.5 31.6 33.5 35.0 36.0 36.0 36.0 -- 36.0 36.0
70 22.0 24.9 27.4 29.6 31.4 32.9 34.1 34.9 35.4 36.0 35.3 34.8
60 20.3 23.1 25.6 27.8 29.7 31.2 32.3 33.1 33.6 33.8 33.6 33.0
50 18.6 21.5 24.0 26.2 28.0 29.5 30.7 31.5 32.0 32.1 31.9 31.4
40 17.0 19.9 22.4 24.6 26.4 27.9 29.1 29.9 30.4 30.5 30.3 29.8
30 15.3 18.1 20.7 22.8 24.7 26.2 27.3 28.2 28.6 28.8 28.6 28.0
20 13.2 16.1 18.6 20.8 22.6 24.1 25.3 26.1 26.6 26.7 26.5 26.0
15 11.9 14.8 17.3 19.5 21.3 22.8 24.0 24.8 25.3 25.4 25.2 24.7
10 10.4 13.2 15.7 17.9 19.8 21.3 22.4 23.2 23.7 23.9 23.7 23.1
5 8.0 10.9 13.4 15.6 17.4 18.9 20.1 20.9 21.4 21.5 21.3 20.8
 J.C. Arango-Lasprilla et al. / Rey–Osterrieth Complex Figure Test 9

Table A8. Normative data for the ROCF copy stratified by age for PARAGUAY
Age (Years)
Percentile
6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17
95 26.3 29.5 32.3 34.8 36.0 -- -- -- -- -- -- --
90 24.0 27.2 30.0 32.5 34.6 36.0 -- -- -- -- -- --
85 22.4 25.7 28.5 31.0 33.1 34.8 36.0 -- -- -- -- --
80 21.2 24.4 27.2 29.7 31.8 33.5 34.9 36.0 36.0 36.0 36.0 36.0
70 19.1 22.3 25.2 27.7 29.8 31.5 32.9 33.8 34.5 34.7 34.6 34.1
60 17.4 20.6 23.5 25.9 28.0 29.8 31.1 32.1 32.8 33.0 32.9 32.4
50 15.8 19.0 21.9 24.3 26.4 28.2 29.5 30.5 31.2 31.4 31.3 30.8
40 14.2 17.4 20.3 22.8 24.9 26.6 28.0 28.9 29.6 29.8 29.7 29.2
30 12.5 15.7 18.6 21.0 23.1 24.9 26.2 27.2 27.9 28.1 28.0 27.5
20 10.5 13.7 16.5 19.0 21.1 22.8 24.2 25.2 25.8 26.1 26.0 25.5
15 9.2 12.4 15.3 17.7 19.8 21.6 22.9 23.9 24.5 24.8 24.7 24.2
10 7.7 10.9 13.7 16.2 18.3 20.0 21.4 22.4 23.0 23.3 23.2 22.7
5 5.4 8.6 11.4 13.9 16.0 17.7 19.1 20.1 20.7 21.0 20.9 20.4
 J.C. Arango-Lasprilla et al. / Rey–Osterrieth Complex Figure Test 10

Table A9. Normative data for the ROCF copy stratified by age for PERU
Age (Years)
Percentile
6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17
95 30.3 32.9 36.0 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
90 28.4 31.0 33.3 36.0 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
85 27.1 29.7 32.1 34.1 36.0 -- -- -- -- -- -- --
80 26.1 28.7 31.0 33.0 34.7 36.0 -- -- -- -- -- --
70 24.4 27.0 29.3 31.3 33.0 34.5 36.0 36.0 -- -- -- 36.0
60 22.9 25.6 27.9 29.9 31.6 33.0 34.1 34.9 36.0 36.0 36.0 34.3
50 21.6 24.2 26.6 28.6 30.3 31.7 32.8 33.6 34.1 34.3 34.2 33.0
40 20.3 22.9 25.2 27.3 29.0 30.4 31.5 32.3 32.8 33.0 32.8 31.7
30 18.8 21.5 23.8 25.8 27.5 28.9 30.0 30.8 31.3 31.5 31.4 30.3
20 17.1 19.8 22.1 24.1 25.8 27.2 28.4 29.2 29.6 29.8 29.7 28.6
15 16.1 18.7 21.0 23.1 24.8 26.2 27.3 28.1 28.6 28.8 28.7 27.5
10 14.8 17.4 19.8 21.8 23.5 24.9 26.0 26.8 27.3 27.5 27.4 26.2
5 12.9 15.5 17.9 19.9 21.6 23.0 24.1 24.9 25.4 25.6 25.5 24.3
 J.C. Arango-Lasprilla et al. / Rey–Osterrieth Complex Figure Test 11

Table A10. Normative data for the ROCF copy stratified by age and MLPE for PUERTO RICO: BOYS
Age (Years)
Percentile
6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17
95 26.4 27.9 29.3 30.8 32.2 33.7 35.1 36.0 -- -- -- --
90 24.3 25.7 27.2 28.6 30.1 31.5 33.0 34.4 36.0 -- -- --
85 22.9 24.3 25.7 27.2 28.6 30.1 31.5 33.0 34.4 36.0 -- --
80 21.7 23.1 24.5 26.0 27.4 28.9 30.3 31.8 33.2 34.7 36.0 --
MLPE > 12 years

70 19.7 21.2 22.6 24.1 25.5 27.0 28.4 29.9 31.3 32.7 34.2 36.0
60 18.1 19.6 21.0 22.5 23.9 25.3 26.8 28.2 29.7 31.1 32.6 34.0
50 16.6 18.1 19.5 21.0 22.4 23.9 25.3 26.7 28.2 29.6 31.1 32.5
40 15.1 16.6 18.0 19.5 20.9 22.4 23.8 25.2 26.7 28.1 29.6 31.0
30 13.5 15.0 16.4 17.8 19.3 20.7 22.2 23.6 25.1 26.5 28.0 29.4
20 11.6 13.0 14.5 15.9 17.4 18.8 20.3 21.7 23.2 24.6 26.0 27.5
15 10.4 11.8 13.3 14.7 16.2 17.6 19.1 20.5 22.0 23.4 24.8 26.3
10 9.0 10.4 11.9 13.3 14.7 16.2 17.6 19.1 20.5 22.0 23.4 24.9
5 6.8 8.3 9.7 11.1 12.6 14.0 15.5 16.9 18.4 19.8 21.3 22.7

95 24.4 25.8 27.3 28.7 30.2 31.6 33.1 34.5 36.0 -- -- --

90 22.2 23.7 25.1 26.6 28.0 29.5 30.9 32.4 33.8 36.0 -- --
85 20.8 22.3 23.7 25.1 26.6 28.0 29.5 30.9 32.4 33.8 36.0 --
80 19.6 21.1 22.5 23.9 25.4 26.8 28.3 29.7 31.2 32.6 34.1 36.0
MLPE ≤ 12 years

70 17.7 19.1 20.6 22.0 23.5 24.9 26.4 27.8 29.3 30.7 32.1 33.6
60 16.1 17.5 19.0 20.4 21.9 23.3 24.7 26.2 27.6 29.1 30.5 32.0
50 14.6 16.0 17.5 18.9 20.4 21.8 23.2 24.7 26.1 27.6 29.0 30.5
40 13.1 14.5 16.0 17.4 18.9 20.3 21.8 23.2 24.6 26.1 27.5 29.0
30 11.5 12.9 14.4 15.8 17.2 18.7 20.1 21.6 23.0 24.5 25.9 27.4
20 9.5 11.0 12.4 13.9 15.3 16.8 18.2 19.7 21.1 22.6 24.0 25.4
15 8.4 9.8 11.2 12.7 14.1 15.6 17.0 18.5 19.9 21.4 22.8 24.2
10 6.9 8.4 9.8 11.2 12.7 14.1 15.6 17.0 18.5 19.9 21.4 22.8
5 4.8 6.2 7.6 9.1 10.5 12.0 13.4 14.9 16.3 17.8 19.2 20.7
Note. MLPE: Mean level of parental education
 J.C. Arango-Lasprilla et al. / Rey–Osterrieth Complex Figure Test 12

Table A11. Normative data for the ROCF copy stratified by age and MLPE for PUERTO RICO: GIRLS
Age (Years)
Percentile
6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17
95 30.5 31.9 33.4 34.8 36.0 -- -- -- -- -- -- --
90 28.3 29.8 31.2 32.7 34.1 36.0 -- -- -- -- -- --
85 26.9 28.3 29.8 31.2 32.7 34.1 36.0 -- -- -- -- --
80 25.7 27.1 28.6 30.0 31.5 32.9 34.4 36.0 -- -- -- --
MLPE > 12 years

70 23.8 25.2 26.7 28.1 29.6 31.0 32.4 33.9 36.0 36.0 -- --
60 22.2 23.6 25.0 26.5 27.9 29.4 30.8 32.3 33.7 35.2 36.0 --
50 20.7 22.1 23.5 25.0 26.4 27.9 29.3 30.8 32.2 33.7 35.1 36.0
40 19.2 20.6 22.1 23.5 24.9 26.4 27.8 29.3 30.7 32.2 33.6 35.1
30 17.5 19.0 20.4 21.9 23.3 24.8 26.2 27.7 29.1 30.5 32.0 33.4
20 15.6 17.1 18.5 20.0 21.4 22.9 24.3 25.7 27.2 28.6 30.1 31.5
15 14.4 15.9 17.3 18.8 20.2 21.7 23.1 24.5 26.0 27.4 28.9 30.3
10 13.0 14.4 15.9 17.3 18.8 20.2 21.7 23.1 24.6 26.0 27.4 28.9
5 10.8 12.3 13.7 15.2 16.6 18.1 19.5 21.0 22.4 23.8 25.3 26.7

95 28.4 29.9 31.3 32.8 34.2 35.7 36.0 -- -- -- -- --

90 26.3 27.7 29.2 30.6 32.1 33.5 34.9 36.0 -- -- -- --
85 24.8 26.3 27.7 29.2 30.6 32.1 33.5 35.0 36.0 -- -- --
80 23.6 25.1 26.5 28.0 29.4 30.9 32.3 33.8 35.2 36.0 -- --
MLPE ≤ 12 years

70 21.7 23.2 24.6 26.1 27.5 28.9 30.4 31.8 33.3 34.7 36.0 --
60 20.1 21.6 23.0 24.4 25.9 27.3 28.8 30.2 31.7 33.1 34.6 36.0
50 18.6 20.1 21.5 22.9 24.4 25.8 27.3 28.7 30.2 31.6 33.1 34.5
40 17.1 18.6 20.0 21.4 22.9 24.3 25.8 27.2 28.7 30.1 31.6 33.0
30 15.5 16.9 18.4 19.8 21.3 22.7 24.2 25.6 27.1 28.5 29.9 31.4
20 13.6 15.0 16.5 17.9 19.4 20.8 22.2 23.7 25.1 26.6 28.0 29.5
15 12.4 13.8 15.3 16.7 18.2 19.6 21.1 22.5 23.9 25.4 26.8 28.3
10 10.9 12.4 13.8 15.3 16.7 18.2 19.6 21.1 22.5 23.9 25.4 26.8
5 8.8 10.2 11.7 13.1 14.6 16.0 17.5 18.9 20.3 21.8 23.2 24.7
Note. MLPE: Mean level of parental education
 J.C. Arango-Lasprilla et al. / Rey–Osterrieth Complex Figure Test 13

Table A12. Normative data for the ROCF copy stratified by age and MLPE for SPAIN
Age (Years)
Percentile
6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17
95 29.8 32.9 36.0 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
90 28.1 31.2 34.0 36.0 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
85 27.0 30.1 32.9 35.2 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
80 26.1 29.2 31.9 34.3 36.0 -- -- -- -- -- -- --
MLPE > 12 years

70 24.6 27.7 30.5 32.8 34.7 36.0 -- -- -- -- -- --

60 23.4 26.5 29.2 31.5 33.5 35.0 36.0 -- -- -- -- 36.0
50 22.2 25.3 28.1 30.4 32.3 33.9 35.0 36.0 36.0 36.0 36.0 34.6
40 21.0 24.2 26.9 29.2 31.2 32.7 33.9 34.6 35.0 35.0 34.5 33.4
30 19.8 22.9 25.6 28.0 29.9 31.5 32.6 33.4 33.7 33.7 33.3 32.2
20 18.3 21.4 24.2 26.5 28.4 30.0 31.1 31.9 32.3 32.2 31.8 30.7
15 17.4 20.5 23.2 25.6 27.5 29.1 30.2 31.0 31.3 31.3 30.9 29.8
10 16.3 19.4 22.1 24.5 26.4 28.0 29.1 29.9 30.2 30.2 29.8 28.6
5 14.6 17.7 20.5 22.8 24.7 26.3 27.4 28.2 28.6 28.5 28.1 27.0

95 28.2 31.3 34.1 36.0 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

90 26.5 29.7 32.4 34.7 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
85 25.4 28.6 31.3 33.6 36.0 -- -- -- -- -- -- --
80 24.5 27.6 30.4 32.7 34.6 36.0 -- -- -- -- -- --
MLPE ≤ 12 years

70 23.0 26.1 28.9 31.2 33.2 34.7 36.0 36.0 -- -- 36.0 36.0
60 21.8 24.9 27.6 30.0 31.9 33.5 34.6 35.4 36.0 36.0 35.3 34.1
50 20.6 23.7 26.5 28.8 30.7 32.3 33.5 34.2 34.6 34.5 34.1 33.0
40 19.5 22.6 25.3 27.7 29.6 31.1 32.3 33.1 33.4 33.4 33.0 31.8
30 18.2 21.3 24.1 26.4 28.3 29.9 31.0 31.8 32.2 32.1 31.7 30.6
20 16.7 19.9 22.6 24.9 26.9 28.4 29.6 30.3 30.7 30.7 30.2 29.1
15 15.8 18.9 21.7 24.0 25.9 27.5 28.6 29.4 29.8 29.7 29.3 28.2
10 14.7 17.8 20.6 22.9 24.8 26.4 27.5 28.3 28.7 28.6 28.2 27.1
5 13.0 16.2 18.9 21.2 23.2 24.7 25.9 26.6 27.0 27.0 26.5 25.4
Note. MLPE: Mean level of parental education
 J.C. Arango-Lasprilla et al. / Rey–Osterrieth Complex Figure Test 14

Table A13. Normative data for the ROCF immediate recall (3 minutes) stratified by age for CHILE: BOYS
Age (Years)
Percentile
6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17
95 13.6 15.2 16.7 18.3 19.8 21.4 22.9 24.5 26.0 27.6 29.1 30.7
90 11.6 13.2 14.7 16.3 17.8 19.4 20.9 22.5 24.0 25.6 27.1 28.7
85 10.3 11.8 13.4 14.9 16.5 18.0 19.6 21.1 22.7 24.2 25.8 27.3
80 9.2 10.7 12.3 13.8 15.4 16.9 18.5 20.0 21.6 23.1 24.7 26.2
70 7.4 9.0 10.5 12.1 13.6 15.2 16.7 18.3 19.8 21.4 22.9 24.5
60 5.9 7.5 9.0 10.6 12.1 13.7 15.2 16.8 18.3 19.9 21.4 23.0
50 4.6 6.1 7.7 9.2 10.8 12.3 13.9 15.4 17.0 18.5 20.1 21.6
40 3.2 4.7 6.3 7.8 9.4 10.9 12.5 14.0 15.6 17.1 18.7 20.2
30 1.7 3.3 4.8 6.4 7.9 9.5 11.0 12.6 14.1 15.7 17.2 18.8
20 -- 1.5 3.0 4.6 6.1 7.7 9.2 10.8 12.3 13.9 15.4 17.0
15 -- 0.4 1.9 3.5 5.0 6.6 8.1 9.7 11.2 12.8 14.3 15.9
10 -- -- 0.6 2.2 3.7 5.3 6.8 8.4 9.9 11.5 13.0 14.6
5 -- -- -- 0.2 1.7 3.3 4.8 6.4 7.9 9.5 11.0 12.6
 J.C. Arango-Lasprilla et al. / Rey–Osterrieth Complex Figure Test 15

Table A14. Normative data for the ROCF immediate recall (3 minutes) stratified by age for CHILE: GIRLS
Age (Years)
Percentile
6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17
95 14.8 16.4 17.9 19.5 21.0 22.6 24.1 25.7 27.2 28.8 30.3 31.9
90 12.8 14.4 15.9 17.5 19.0 20.6 22.1 23.7 25.2 26.8 28.3 29.9
85 11.5 13.1 14.6 16.2 17.7 19.3 20.8 22.4 23.9 25.5 27.0 28.6
80 10.4 12.0 13.5 15.1 16.6 18.2 19.7 21.3 22.8 24.4 25.9 27.5
70 8.6 10.2 11.7 13.3 14.8 16.4 17.9 19.5 21.0 22.6 24.1 25.7
60 7.2 8.7 10.3 11.8 13.4 14.9 16.5 18.0 19.6 21.1 22.7 24.2
50 5.8 7.3 8.9 10.4 12.0 13.5 15.1 16.6 18.2 19.7 21.3 22.8
40 4.4 5.9 7.5 9.0 10.6 12.1 13.7 15.2 16.8 18.3 19.9 21.4
30 2.9 4.5 6.0 7.6 9.1 10.7 12.2 13.8 15.3 16.9 18.4 20.0
20 1.1 2.7 4.2 5.8 7.3 8.9 10.4 12.0 13.5 15.1 16.6 18.2
15 -- 1.6 3.1 4.7 6.2 7.8 9.3 10.9 12.4 14.0 15.5 17.1
10 -- 0.3 1.8 3.4 4.9 6.5 8.0 9.6 11.1 12.7 14.2 15.8
5 -- -- -- 1.4 2.9 4.5 6.0 7.6 9.1 10.7 12.2 13.8
 J.C. Arango-Lasprilla et al. / Rey–Osterrieth Complex Figure Test 16

Table A15. Normative data for the ROCF immediate recall (3 minutes) stratified by age for CUBA
Age (Years)
Percentile
6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17
95 21.0 24.4 27.6 30.4 32.9 35.2 36.0 -- -- -- -- --
90 18.6 22.0 25.1 28.0 30.5 32.8 34.7 36.0 -- -- -- --
85 17.0 20.4 23.5 26.4 28.9 31.1 33.1 34.8 36.0 -- -- --
80 15.7 19.1 22.2 25.0 27.5 29.8 31.8 33.4 34.8 36.0 36.0 36.0
70 13.5 16.9 20.0 22.9 25.4 27.6 29.6 31.3 32.7 33.8 34.6 35.1
60 11.7 15.1 18.2 21.0 23.6 25.8 27.8 29.5 30.8 31.9 32.7 33.3
50 10.0 13.4 16.5 19.4 21.9 24.1 26.1 27.8 29.2 30.3 31.1 31.6
40 8.3 11.7 14.9 17.7 20.2 22.5 24.4 26.1 27.5 28.6 29.4 29.9
30 6.5 9.9 13.0 15.9 18.4 20.7 22.6 24.3 25.7 26.8 27.6 28.1
20 4.4 7.8 10.9 13.7 16.3 18.5 20.5 22.1 23.5 24.6 25.4 25.9
15 3.0 6.4 9.5 12.4 14.9 17.2 19.1 20.8 22.2 23.3 24.1 24.6
10 1.4 4.8 7.9 10.8 13.3 15.5 17.5 19.2 20.6 21.6 22.5 23.0
5 -- 2.4 5.5 8.3 10.9 13.1 15.1 16.8 18.1 19.2 20.0 20.5
 J.C. Arango-Lasprilla et al. / Rey–Osterrieth Complex Figure Test 17

Table A16. Normative data for the ROCF immediate recall (3 minutes) stratified by age for ECUADOR
Age (Years)
Percentile
6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17
95 20.8 22.9 24.8 26.5 28.0 29.3 30.5 31.4 32.1 32.5 32.8 32.9
90 18.3 20.4 22.3 24.0 25.6 26.9 28.0 28.9 29.6 30.1 30.4 30.4
85 16.6 18.7 20.7 22.4 23.9 25.2 26.3 27.2 27.9 28.4 28.7 28.8
80 15.2 17.4 19.3 21.0 22.5 23.8 24.9 25.8 26.5 27.0 27.3 27.4
70 13.0 15.2 17.1 18.8 20.3 21.6 22.7 23.6 24.3 24.8 25.1 25.2
60 11.2 13.3 15.2 16.9 18.5 19.8 20.9 21.8 22.5 23.0 23.3 23.3
50 9.5 11.6 13.5 15.2 16.7 18.1 19.2 20.1 20.8 21.2 21.5 21.6
40 7.7 9.9 11.8 13.5 15.0 16.3 17.4 18.3 19.0 19.5 19.8 19.9
30 5.9 8.0 9.9 11.6 13.2 14.5 15.6 16.5 17.2 17.7 18.0 18.0
20 3.7 5.8 7.7 9.4 11.0 12.3 13.4 14.3 15.0 15.5 15.7 15.8
15 2.3 4.4 6.3 8.1 9.6 10.9 12.0 12.9 13.6 14.1 14.4 14.5
10 0.6 2.8 4.7 6.4 7.9 9.2 10.3 11.2 11.9 12.4 12.7 12.8
5 -- 0.3 2.2 3.9 5.4 6.8 7.9 8.8 9.5 9.9 10.2 10.3
 J.C. Arango-Lasprilla et al. / Rey–Osterrieth Complex Figure Test 18

Table A17. Normative data for the ROCF immediate recall (3 minutes) stratified by age for GUATEMALA
Age (Years)
Percentile
6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17
95 21.5 23.0 24.5 26.0 27.6 29.1 30.6 32.1 33.6 35.2 36.0 --
90 19.3 20.8 22.4 23.9 25.4 26.9 28.4 30.0 31.5 33.0 34.5 36.0
85 17.9 19.4 20.9 22.4 23.9 25.5 27.0 28.5 30.0 31.5 33.1 34.6
80 16.7 18.2 19.7 21.2 22.7 24.3 25.8 27.3 28.8 30.3 31.9 33.4
70 14.7 16.2 17.8 19.3 20.8 22.3 23.8 25.4 26.9 28.4 29.9 31.4
60 13.1 14.6 16.1 17.7 19.2 20.7 22.2 23.7 25.3 26.8 28.3 29.8
50 11.6 13.1 14.6 16.1 17.7 19.2 20.7 22.2 23.7 25.3 26.8 28.3
40 10.1 11.6 13.1 14.6 16.2 17.7 19.2 20.7 22.2 23.8 25.3 26.8
30 8.4 10.0 11.5 13.0 14.5 16.0 17.6 19.1 20.6 22.1 23.6 25.2
20 6.5 8.0 9.6 11.1 12.6 14.1 15.6 17.2 18.7 20.2 21.7 23.2
15 5.3 6.8 8.4 9.9 11.4 12.9 14.4 16.0 17.5 19.0 20.5 22.0
10 3.9 5.4 6.9 8.4 9.9 11.5 13.0 14.5 16.0 17.5 19.1 20.6
5 1.7 3.2 4.7 6.2 7.8 9.3 10.8 12.3 13.8 15.4 16.9 18.4
 J.C. Arango-Lasprilla et al. / Rey–Osterrieth Complex Figure Test 19

Table A18. Normative data for the ROCF immediate recall (3 minutes) stratified by age for HONDURAS
Age (Years)
Percentile
6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17
95 18.2 19.7 21.2 22.7 24.2 25.7 27.1 28.6 30.1 31.6 33.1 34.6
90 16.2 17.7 19.1 20.6 22.1 23.6 25.1 26.6 28.1 29.6 31.0 32.5
85 14.8 16.3 17.8 19.3 20.7 22.2 23.7 25.2 26.7 28.2 29.7 31.2
80 13.7 15.1 16.6 18.1 19.6 21.1 22.6 24.1 25.6 27.0 28.5 30.0
70 11.8 13.3 14.8 16.3 17.8 19.3 20.8 22.2 23.7 25.2 26.7 28.2
60 10.3 11.8 13.3 14.8 16.2 17.7 19.2 20.7 22.2 23.7 25.2 26.6
50 8.9 10.4 11.8 13.3 14.8 16.3 17.8 19.3 20.8 22.3 23.7 25.2
40 7.4 8.9 10.4 11.9 13.4 14.9 16.4 17.9 19.3 20.8 22.3 23.8
30 5.9 7.4 8.9 10.4 11.9 13.3 14.8 16.3 17.8 19.3 20.8 22.3
20 4.1 5.6 7.1 8.5 10.0 11.5 13.0 14.5 16.0 17.5 18.9 20.4
15 2.9 4.4 5.9 7.4 8.9 10.4 11.9 13.3 14.8 16.3 17.8 19.3
10 1.6 3.1 4.5 6.0 7.5 9.0 10.5 12.0 13.5 15.0 16.4 17.9
5 -- 1.0 2.5 4.0 5.5 7.0 8.4 9.9 11.4 12.9 14.4 15.9
 J.C. Arango-Lasprilla et al. / Rey–Osterrieth Complex Figure Test 20

Table A19. Normative data for the ROCF immediate recall (3 minutes) stratified by age for MEXICO
Age (Years)
Percentile
6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17
95 19.5 21.9 24.0 25.9 27.6 29.1 30.3 31.4 32.2 32.7 33.1 33.2
90 17.1 19.5 21.6 23.5 25.2 26.7 27.9 28.9 29.7 30.3 30.7 30.8
85 15.5 17.8 20.0 21.9 23.6 25.0 26.3 27.3 28.1 28.7 29.1 29.2
80 14.2 16.5 18.6 20.5 22.2 23.7 24.9 26.0 26.8 27.3 27.7 27.8
70 12.0 14.3 16.5 18.4 20.1 21.5 22.8 23.8 24.6 25.2 25.5 25.7
60 10.2 12.5 14.7 16.6 18.2 19.7 21.0 22.0 22.8 23.4 23.7 23.9
50 8.5 10.8 13.0 14.9 16.6 18.0 19.3 20.3 21.1 21.7 22.0 22.2
40 6.8 9.1 11.3 13.2 14.9 16.3 17.6 18.6 19.4 20.0 20.4 20.5
30 5.0 7.3 9.5 11.4 13.1 14.5 15.8 16.8 17.6 18.2 18.5 18.7
20 2.8 5.2 7.3 9.2 10.9 12.4 13.6 14.6 15.4 16.0 16.4 16.5
15 1.5 3.8 5.9 7.9 9.5 11.0 12.3 13.3 14.1 14.7 15.0 15.2
10 -- 2.2 4.3 6.2 7.9 9.4 10.6 11.7 12.5 13.0 13.4 13.5
5 -- -- 1.9 3.8 5.5 7.0 8.2 9.2 10.0 10.6 11.0 11.1
 J.C. Arango-Lasprilla et al. / Rey–Osterrieth Complex Figure Test 21

Table A20. Normative data for the ROCF immediate recall (3 minutes) stratified by age and MLPE for PARAGUAY
Age (Years)
Percentile
6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17
95 22.2 23.4 24.7 25.9 27.1 28.3 29.5 30.7 31.9 33.1 34.3 35.6
90 20.0 21.2 22.4 23.6 24.8 26.0 27.2 28.4 29.6 30.8 32.1 33.3
85 18.4 19.6 20.8 22.1 23.3 24.5 25.7 26.9 28.1 29.3 30.5 31.7
80 17.2 18.4 19.6 20.8 22.0 23.2 24.4 25.6 26.8 28.0 29.3 30.5
MLPE > 12 years

70 15.1 16.3 17.5 18.8 20.0 21.2 22.4 23.6 24.8 26.0 27.2 28.4
60 13.4 14.6 15.8 17.0 18.2 19.5 20.7 21.9 23.1 24.3 25.5 26.7
50 11.8 13.0 14.2 15.4 16.7 17.9 19.1 20.3 21.5 22.7 23.9 25.1
40 10.2 11.4 12.7 13.9 15.1 16.3 17.5 18.7 19.9 21.1 22.3 23.5
30 8.5 9.7 10.9 12.1 13.4 14.6 15.8 17.0 18.2 19.4 20.6 21.8
20 6.5 7.7 8.9 10.1 11.3 12.5 13.7 15.0 16.2 17.4 18.6 19.8
15 5.2 6.4 7.6 8.8 10.1 11.3 12.5 13.7 14.9 16.1 17.3 18.5
10 3.7 4.9 6.1 7.3 8.5 9.7 10.9 12.2 13.4 14.6 15.8 17.0
5 1.4 2.6 3.8 5.0 6.2 7.4 8.7 9.9 11.1 12.3 13.5 14.7

95 19.9 21.1 22.3 23.5 24.7 25.9 27.2 28.4 29.6 30.8 32.0 33.2
90 17.6 18.8 20.0 21.2 22.4 23.7 24.9 26.1 27.3 28.5 29.7 30.9
85 16.1 17.3 18.5 19.7 20.9 22.1 23.3 24.5 25.8 27.0 28.2 29.4
80 14.8 16.0 17.2 18.4 19.6 20.9 22.1 23.3 24.5 25.7 26.9 28.1
MLPE ≤ 12 years

70 12.8 14.0 15.2 16.4 17.6 18.8 20.0 21.2 22.5 23.7 24.9 26.1
60 11.1 12.3 13.5 14.7 15.9 17.1 18.3 19.5 20.7 22.0 23.2 24.4
50 9.5 10.7 11.9 13.1 14.3 15.5 16.7 17.9 19.2 20.4 21.6 22.8
40 7.9 9.1 10.3 11.5 12.7 13.9 15.1 16.4 17.6 18.8 20.0 21.2
30 6.2 7.4 8.6 9.8 11.0 12.2 13.4 14.6 15.8 17.1 18.3 19.5
20 4.1 5.3 6.6 7.8 9.0 10.2 11.4 12.6 13.8 15.0 16.2 17.4
15 2.9 4.1 5.3 6.5 7.7 8.9 10.1 11.3 12.5 13.8 15.0 16.2
10 1.3 2.5 3.8 5.0 6.2 7.4 8.6 9.8 11.0 12.2 13.4 14.7
5 -- 0.3 1.5 2.7 3.9 5.1 6.3 7.5 8.7 9.9 11.2 12.4
Note. MLPE: Mean level of parental education
 J.C. Arango-Lasprilla et al. / Rey–Osterrieth Complex Figure Test 22

Table A21. Normative data for the ROCF immediate recall (3 minutes) stratified by age for PERU
Age (Years)
Percentile
6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17
95 18.0 21.2 24.1 26.7 29.0 31.0 32.7 34.1 35.2 36.0 36.0 36.0
90 15.5 18.7 21.6 24.2 26.5 28.5 30.2 31.6 32.7 33.6 34.1 34.2
85 13.9 17.1 20.0 22.6 24.9 26.9 28.6 30.0 31.1 31.9 32.4 32.6
80 12.5 15.7 18.6 21.2 23.5 25.5 27.2 28.6 29.7 30.5 31.1 31.2
70 10.3 13.5 16.4 19.0 21.3 23.3 25.0 26.4 27.5 28.4 28.9 29.0
60 8.5 11.7 14.6 17.2 19.5 21.5 23.2 24.6 25.7 26.5 27.0 27.2
50 6.8 10.0 12.9 15.5 17.8 19.8 21.5 22.9 24.0 24.8 25.3 25.4
40 5.1 8.3 11.2 13.7 16.0 18.0 19.8 21.2 22.3 23.1 23.6 23.7
30 3.2 6.4 9.3 11.9 14.2 16.2 17.9 19.3 20.4 21.2 21.7 21.9
20 1.0 4.2 7.1 9.7 12.0 14.0 15.7 17.1 18.2 19.0 19.6 19.7
15 -- 2.8 5.7 8.3 10.6 12.6 14.3 15.7 16.9 17.7 18.2 18.3
10 -- 1.2 4.1 6.7 9.0 11.0 12.7 14.1 15.2 16.0 16.5 16.7
5 -- -- 1.6 4.2 6.5 8.5 10.2 11.6 12.7 13.6 14.1 14.2
 J.C. Arango-Lasprilla et al. / Rey–Osterrieth Complex Figure Test 23

Table A22. Normative data for the ROCF immediate recall (3 minutes) stratified by age for PUERTO RICO: BOYS
Age (Years)
Percentile
6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17
95 16.8 18.1 19.3 20.6 21.8 23.1 24.3 25.6 26.8 28.1 29.3 30.6
90 14.5 15.7 17.0 18.2 19.5 20.7 22.0 23.2 24.4 25.7 26.9 28.2
85 12.9 14.1 15.4 16.6 17.9 19.1 20.4 21.6 22.9 24.1 25.4 26.6
80 11.6 12.8 14.1 15.3 16.6 17.8 19.1 20.3 21.6 22.8 24.0 25.3
70 9.5 10.7 12.0 13.2 14.5 15.7 17.0 18.2 19.5 20.7 21.9 23.2
60 7.7 8.9 10.2 11.4 12.7 13.9 15.2 16.4 17.7 18.9 20.2 21.4
50 6.1 7.3 8.6 9.8 11.0 12.3 13.5 14.8 16.0 17.3 18.5 19.8
40 4.4 5.7 6.9 8.2 9.4 10.6 11.9 13.1 14.4 15.6 16.9 18.1
30 2.6 3.9 5.1 6.4 7.6 8.9 10.1 11.4 12.6 13.9 15.1 16.4
20 0.5 1.8 3.0 4.3 5.5 6.8 8.0 9.3 10.5 11.8 13.0 14.2
15 -- 0.5 1.7 3.0 4.2 5.5 6.7 7.9 9.2 10.4 11.7 12.9
10 -- -- 0.1 1.4 2.6 3.9 5.1 6.4 7.6 8.9 10.1 11.4
5 -- -- -- -- 0.3 1.5 2.8 4.0 5.2 6.5 7.7 9.0
 J.C. Arango-Lasprilla et al. / Rey–Osterrieth Complex Figure Test 24

Table A23. Normative data for the ROCF immediate recall (3 minutes) stratified by age for PUERTO RICO: GIRLS
Age (Years)
Percentile
6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17
95 21.4 22.6 23.9 25.1 26.4 27.6 28.9 30.1 31.4 32.6 33.9 35.1
90 19.0 20.3 21.5 22.8 24.0 25.3 26.5 27.8 29.0 30.3 31.5 32.7
85 17.5 18.7 19.9 21.2 22.4 23.7 24.9 26.2 27.4 28.7 29.9 31.2
80 16.1 17.4 18.6 19.9 21.1 22.4 23.6 24.9 26.1 27.4 28.6 29.9
70 14.0 15.3 16.5 17.8 19.0 20.3 21.5 22.8 24.0 25.3 26.5 27.7
60 12.3 13.5 14.8 16.0 17.2 18.5 19.7 21.0 22.2 23.5 24.7 26.0
50 10.6 11.9 13.1 14.4 15.6 16.9 18.1 19.3 20.6 21.8 23.1 24.3
40 9.0 10.2 11.5 12.7 14.0 15.2 16.5 17.7 18.9 20.2 21.4 22.7
30 7.2 8.4 9.7 10.9 12.2 13.4 14.7 15.9 17.2 18.4 19.7 20.9
20 5.1 6.3 7.6 8.8 10.1 11.3 12.6 13.8 15.1 16.3 17.6 18.8
15 3.8 5.0 6.3 7.5 8.8 10.0 11.3 12.5 13.8 15.0 16.2 17.5
10 2.2 3.4 4.7 5.9 7.2 8.4 9.7 10.9 12.2 13.4 14.7 15.9
5 -- 1.1 2.3 3.6 4.8 6.1 7.3 8.6 9.8 11.1 12.3 13.5
 J.C. Arango-Lasprilla et al. / Rey–Osterrieth Complex Figure Test 25

Table A24. Normative data for the ROCF immediate recall (3 minutes) stratified by age and MLPE for SPAIN
Age (Years)
Percentile
6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17
95 21.1 23.9 26.4 28.7 30.7 32.5 34.0 35.3 36.0 -- -- --
90 18.8 21.6 24.1 26.4 28.4 30.2 31.7 33.0 34.0 36.0 36.0 36.0
85 17.2 20.0 22.5 24.8 26.8 28.6 30.1 31.4 32.4 33.2 33.7 34.0
80 15.9 18.7 21.2 23.5 25.6 27.3 28.9 30.1 31.1 31.9 32.4 32.7
MLPE > 12 years

70 13.9 16.6 19.2 21.5 23.5 25.3 26.8 28.1 29.1 29.8 30.3 30.6
60 12.1 14.9 17.4 19.7 21.7 23.5 25.0 26.3 27.3 28.1 28.6 28.9
50 10.5 13.3 15.8 18.1 20.1 21.9 23.4 24.7 25.7 26.5 27.0 27.3
40 8.9 11.7 14.2 16.5 18.5 20.3 21.8 23.1 24.1 24.9 25.4 25.7
30 7.1 9.9 12.5 14.7 16.8 18.6 20.1 21.3 22.4 23.1 23.6 23.9
20 5.1 7.9 10.4 12.7 14.7 16.5 18.0 19.3 20.3 21.1 21.6 21.8
15 3.8 6.6 9.1 11.4 13.4 15.2 16.7 18.0 19.0 19.8 20.3 20.6
10 2.2 5.0 7.6 9.8 11.9 13.6 15.2 16.4 17.5 18.2 18.7 19.0
5 -- 2.7 5.2 7.5 9.5 11.3 12.8 14.1 15.1 15.9 16.4 16.7

95 18.6 21.4 23.9 26.2 28.2 30.0 31.5 32.8 33.8 34.6 35.1 35.4
90 16.3 19.1 21.6 23.9 25.9 27.7 29.2 30.5 31.5 32.2 32.7 33.0
85 14.7 17.5 20.0 22.3 24.3 26.1 27.6 28.9 29.9 30.7 31.2 31.5
80 13.4 16.2 18.7 21.0 23.1 24.8 26.4 27.6 28.6 29.4 29.9 30.2
MLPE ≤ 12 years

70 11.4 14.1 16.7 19.0 21.0 22.8 24.3 25.6 26.6 27.3 27.8 28.1
60 9.6 12.4 14.9 17.2 19.2 21.0 22.5 23.8 24.8 25.6 26.1 26.4
50 8.0 10.8 13.3 15.6 17.6 19.4 20.9 22.2 23.2 24.0 24.5 24.8
40 6.4 9.2 11.7 14.0 16.0 17.8 19.3 20.6 21.6 22.4 22.9 23.2
30 4.6 7.4 10.0 12.2 14.3 16.1 17.6 18.8 19.9 20.6 21.1 21.4
20 2.6 5.4 7.9 10.2 12.2 14.0 15.5 16.8 17.8 18.6 19.1 19.3
15 1.3 4.1 6.6 8.9 10.9 12.7 14.2 15.5 16.5 17.3 17.8 18.1
10 -- 2.5 5.1 7.3 9.4 11.1 12.7 13.9 15.0 15.7 16.2 16.5
5 -- 0.2 2.7 5.0 7.0 8.8 10.3 11.6 12.6 13.4 13.9 14.2
Note. MLPE: Mean level of parental education
Copyright of NeuroRehabilitation is the property of IOS Press and its content may not be
copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's
express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for
individual use.