Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30517598›Full record

ArticleArchives of clinical neuropsychology : the official journal of the National Academy of Neuropsychologists2019

Detection of Mild Cognitive Impairment Among Community-Dwelling African Americans Using the Montreal Cognitive Assessment.

Heidi C Rossetti, Emily E Smith, Linda S Hynan, Laura H Lacritz, C Munro Cullum, Aaron Van Wright, Myron F Weiner

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Archives of clinical neuropsychology : the official journal of the National Academy of Neuropsychologists, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.3field-weighted citation impact, top 19% of its field
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

16 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 27 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. The Montreal Cognitive Assessment: Norms and Reliable Change Indices for Standard and MoCA-22 Administrations.Archives of clinical neuropsychology : the official journal of the National Academy of Neuropsychologists · 2024
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Montreal Cognitive Assessment: Seeking a Single Cutoff Score May Not Be Optimal.Evidence-based complementary and alternative medicine : eCAM · 2021
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. 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

7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Heidi C RossettiDepartment of Psychiatry, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX USA.
Emily E SmithDepartment of Psychiatry, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX USA.
Linda S HynanDepartment of Psychiatry & Clinical Sciences (Biostatistics), University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX USA.
Laura H LacritzDepartment of Psychiatry & Neurology and Neurotherapeutics, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX USA.
C Munro CullumDepartment of Psychiatry & Neurology and Neurotherapeutics, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX USA.
Aaron Van WrightDepartment of Psychiatry, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX USA.
Myron F WeinerDepartment of Psychiatry, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX USA.
The University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center · US

Funding

ROLE OF GLUTAMATE IN ALZHEIMER'S DISEASEP30AG012300 · NIA · UT SOUTHWESTERN MEDICAL CENTER · PI ROSENBERG, ROGER NEWMAN · 1994 to 2016
$26.6M
UT Southwestern Center for Translational Medicine (UL1/KL2/TL1)UL1TR001105 · NCATS · UT SOUTHWESTERN MEDICAL CENTER · PI TOTO, ROBERT DANIEL · 2013 to 2017
$24.5M
NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR001105NIA NIH HHS P30 AG012300
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo establish a cut score for the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) that distinguishes mild cognitive impairment (MCI) from normal cognition (NC) in a community-based African American (AA) sample.

methodsA total of 135 AA participants, from a larger aging study, diagnosed MCI (n = 90) or NC (n = 45) via consensus diagnosis using clinical history, Clinical Dementia Rating score, and comprehensive neuropsychological testing. Logistic regression models utilized sex, education, age, and MoCA score to predict MCI versus NC. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis determined a cut score to distinguish MCI from NC based on optimal sensitivity, specificity, diagnostic accuracy, and greatest perpendicular distance above the identity line. ROC results were compared with previously published MoCA cut scores.

resultsThe MCI group was slightly older (MMCI = 64.76[5.87], MNC = 62.33[6.76]; p = .033) and less educated (MMCI = 13.07[2.37], MNC = 14.36[2.51]; p = .004) and had lower MoCA scores (MMCI=21.26[3.85], MNC = 25.47[2.13]; p < .001) than the NC group. Demographics were non-significant in regression models. The area under the curve (AUC) was significant (MoCA = .83, p < .01) and an optimal cut score of <24 maximized sensitivity (72%), specificity (84%), and provided 76% diagnostic accuracy. In comparison, the traditional cut score of <26 had higher sensitivity (84%), similar accuracy (76%), but much lower specificity (58%).

conclusionsThis study provides a MoCA cut score to help differentiate persons with MCI from NC in a community-dwelling AA sample. A cut score of <24 reduces the likelihood of misclassifying normal AA individuals as impaired than the traditional cut score. This study underscores the importance of culturally appropriate norms to optimize the utility of commonly used cognitive screening measures.

Indexed as

CognitionAgedAged, 80 and overArea Under CurveBlack or African AmericanCase-Control StudiesCognitive DysfunctionFemaleHumansIndependent LivingLogistic ModelsMaleMental Status and Dementia TestsMiddle AgedROC CurveSensitivity and SpecificityCross-cultural/minorityMild cognitive impairmentNorms/normative studies

Identifiers

PMID30517598
PMCPMC6930383
OpenAlexW2902497503

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.