Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25794511›Full record

ReviewAmerican journal of Alzheimer's disease and other dementias2015

Cognitive screening in persons with chronic diseases in primary care: challenges and recommendations for practice.

Ponrathi Athilingam, Constance Visovsky, Amanda F Elliott, Philip J Rogal

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in American journal of Alzheimer's disease and other dementias, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

14 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Observational
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Brain function complexity during dual-tasking is associated with cognitive impairment and age.Journal of neuroimaging : official journal of the American Society of Neuroimaging · 2022
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Ponrathi AthilingamMorsani College of Medicine, University of South Florida, Tampa, FL, USA. pathilin@health.usf.edu
Constance Visovsky
Amanda F Elliott
Philip J Rogal

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

An integrative literature review was performed to identify the challenges in current cognitive screening. The aim of the review was to serve as an evaluative resource to guide clinicians in the selection of the best available cognitive screening measures for early assessment of mild cognitive impairment (MCI) in people with chronic diseases. The review classified the available cognitive screening measures according to purpose, time to administer, and cognitive domains assessed as: 1) simple/ brief cognitive screening measures, 2) disease specific screening measures, 3) domain specific screening measures, 4) self-administered screening measures, and 5) technology-based screening measures. There is no single optimal cognitive measure for all patient populations and settings. Although disease specific cognitive screening measures are optimal, there is a lack of validated screening measures for many chronic diseases. Technology-based screening measure is a promising avenue for increasing the accessibility of cognitive screening. Future work should focus on translating available screening measures to mobile technology format to enhance the utility in busy primary care settings. Early cognitive screening in persons with chronic disease should enhance appropriate referrals for detailed neurocognitive examination and cognitive interventions to preserve and or minimize cognitive decline.

Indexed as

Chronic DiseaseComorbidityPrimary Health CareCognitive DysfunctionHumansNeuropsychological Tests

Identifiers

PMID25794511
PMCPMC10852828

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.