Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33043958›Full record

ArticleArchives of clinical neuropsychology : the official journal of the National Academy of Neuropsychologists2021

Cross-cultural neuropsychological assessment in the European Union: a Delphi expert study.

Sanne Franzen, Janne M Papma, Esther van den Berg, T Rune Nielsen

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Archives of clinical neuropsychology : the official journal of the National Academy of Neuropsychologists, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
3.0field-weighted citation impact, top 8% 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

25 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 50 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Diversity in Alzheimer's disease drug trials: The importance of eligibility criteria.Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association · 2022
    Pooled it
  4. Linguistic Barriers in U.S. Neuropsychological Assessment: A State-of-the-Art Review.Archives of clinical neuropsychology : the official journal of the National Academy of Neuropsychologists · 2026
    Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Gaps in clinical research in frontotemporal dementia: A call for diversity and disparities-focused research.Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association · 2023
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
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 at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Sanne FranzenDepartment of Neurology, Erasmus MC University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-4461-5109
Janne M PapmaDepartment of Neurology, Erasmus MC University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Esther van den BergDepartment of Neurology, Erasmus MC University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
T Rune NielsenDanish Dementia Research Centre, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Erasmus MC · NLUniversity of Copenhagen · DK

Funding

The Netherlands Organisation for Health Research and Development 733050834
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThe increasing ethnic diversity in the European Union (EU) calls for adaptations to neuropsychological assessment practices. The aims of this study were to examine the current state of cross-cultural neuropsychological assessment in EU-15 countries and to provide recommendations for researchers and policy makers.

methodTwelve experts from nine EU-15 countries participated in a Delphi consensus study involving two sequential rounds of web-based questionnaires and an in-person consensus meeting. The experts individually rated Delphi topics on the basis of importance (scale 1-10). The degree of consensus was determined by assessing first and third quartiles (Q1 and Q3) and medians.

resultsConsensus outcomes showed the following priorities: (a) the development of tests (median importance rating 10, Q1-Q3: 9-10), (b) the collection of normative data (median importance rating 9, Q1-Q3: 8-10), and (c) more training, awareness, and knowledge regarding cross-cultural assessment among neuropsychologists in the EU (median importance rating 9, Q1-Q3: 8-10). Whereas memory tests were often available, tests measuring social cognition (median 9, Q1-Q3: 8-10) and language (median 9, Q1-Q3: 7-10) are particularly lacking. Recommendations were made regarding essential skills and knowledge necessary for cross-cultural neuropsychological assessment.

conclusionsThis study in a small group of experts suggests that the development and availability of cross-cultural tests and normative data should be prioritized, as well as the development and implementation of training initiatives. Furthermore, EU guidelines could be established for working with interpreters during neuropsychological assessment. Before implementing these recommendations, follow-up studies are recommended that include more minority neuropsychologists and community stakeholders.

Indexed as

Cross-Cultural ComparisonMemoryConsensusEuropean UnionHumansNeuropsychological Testscross cultural test adaptationcultural competencecultural sensitivityDelphi techniqueminority groups

Identifiers

PMID33043958
PMCPMC8292927
OpenAlexW3092045589

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.