ArticleZeitschrift fur Gerontologie und Geriatrie2018
[Validation of the German version of the 6‑item screener : Brief cognitive test with broad application possibilities].
Article in Zeitschrift fur Gerontologie und Geriatrie, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
11 citing papers in PubMed, 21 citations in OpenAlex.
- Observational study on the comparability of the clinical profiles of older adults with hip fractures and pelvic fractures in Germany.Zeitschrift fur Gerontologie und Geriatrie · 2026Article
- Psychosocial risk screening in the inpatient care of physically ill patients: study protocol for a feasibility study.BMJ open · 2026Article
- Higher everyday functioning, lower quality of life, and home care are associated with persisting symptoms after a COVID-19 infection in German care recipients.Frontiers in public health · 2025Article
- A tailored intervention for the detection of patients with coronary heart disease and mental or cognitive comorbidities in the German primary care setting: qualitative evaluation of implementation success.BMC health services research · 2024Article
- Comprehensive geriatric assessment for predicting postoperative delirium in oral and maxillofacial surgery: a prospective cohort study.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Article
- Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on people in need of care or support: protocol for a SARS-CoV-2 registry.BMJ open · 2023Article
- Effects of a Primary Care-Based Intervention on the Identification and Management of Patients with Coronary Heart Disease and Mental or Cognitive Comorbidity-A Study Protocol.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023Article
- Evaluation of a new screening instrument for psychological distress in postacute rehabilitation in older person.European geriatric medicine · 2022Article
- [Prevalence of cognitive impairments in acute nursing care-Analysis and comparison of routine data].Zeitschrift fur Gerontologie und Geriatrie · 2021Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundEspecially during admission the detection of cognitive deficits relevant to everyday life should burden patient and examiner as little as possible. The 6‑item screener (SIS) takes approximately 1 min, is easy to learn, does not require any material and is independent of the patient's visual and fine motor skills. The test was first published in 2002 by Callahan who approved the present German translation.
objectiveWe checked the convergent and discriminant validity, reliability and sensitivity to change of the German translation among geriatric patients. MATERIAL AND
methodsA total of 165 patients in an acute geriatric department performed the SIS (4 times), the mini mental state examination (MMSE, 2 times), clock-drawing test according to Shulman (2 times), the Regensburg verbal fluency test (2 times) and the Montgomery-Åsberg depression rating scale within a period of 16 days. The overall judgment of a physician blinded to the test results served as the reference standard.
resultsThe SIS closely correlated with the medical judgment (-0.729). The retest reliability was 0.705 and the internal consistency 0.821 (Cronbach's alpha). The sensitivity to detect cognitive deficits relevant to activities of daily living was 100% if a threshold of 5 points was chosen. The achievement of maximum points largely rules out even mild cognitive impairment.
conclusionThe SIS is a valid, reliable short cognitive test. Using a threshold of 5 points the SIS detects cognitive deficits relevant to daily living with a higher sensitivity than the MMSE with a threshold of 25. When the maximum score is achieved there are no medical indications for further cognitive assessment of clinically unremarkable geriatric patients. The brevity and simple application of the SIS also enable its application outside geriatric wards.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.