Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30992614›Full record

ArticleIndian journal of psychiatry

Short test of mental status in the detection of mild cognitive impairment in India.

Sreerupa Ghose, Sanjukta Das, Swarup Poria, Tapolagna Das

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Indian journal of psychiatry. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Observational
  2. Article
  3. 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.

Sreerupa GhoseDepartment of Psychology, University of Calcutta, Kolkata, West Bengal, India.
Sanjukta DasDepartment of Psychology, University of Calcutta, Kolkata, West Bengal, India.
Swarup PoriaDepartment of Applied Mathematics, University of Calcutta, Kolkata, West Bengal, India.
Tapolagna DasClinical Psychology Centre of University of Calcutta, Kolkata, West Bengal, India.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

contextMild cognitive impairment (MCI) is an under-diagnosed health problem in the community. Cognitive screening tools are widely used for MCI detection, but many of them lack sensitivity and specificity in MCI detection. On the basis of literature review, Short test of mental status (STMS) was selected for the present purpose.

aimsThe present study purports to standardize STMS for using as a cognitive screening tool in MCI detection in the community-living elderly people in Kolkata. MATERIALS AND

methodsData were collected from 102 community-living elderly people from the city of Kolkata using the purposive method of sampling. MCI was diagnosed using the Peterson's criteria of MCI as the gold standard. A semi-structured demographic proforma, clock-drawing test (CDT), and the Groningen Activity Restriction Scale (GARS) were used for the purpose. Finally, STMS was administered. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Statistical computation was done using the SPSS 21. Descriptive statistics, receiver operating curve analysis, and binary logistic regression were used for statistical analysis of the data. RESULTS AND

conclusionSTMS emerged as a sensitive and specific cognitive screening tool in the detection of MCI in the current cultural setting. It was also found to be more suited for the purpose than CDT. A score of 34.5 with a sensitivity of 97.5 and a specificity of 90.3% were selected for the optimum cutoff score for the detection of MCI in the present population. With a unit increase in STMS score, the odds of getting diagnosed with MCI were found to be reduced by 48.5%.

Indexed as

Cognitive screening testIndiamild cognitive impairment

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
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.