Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33663471›Full record

ArticleBMC medicine2021

Sensitivity and specificity of the Bamberg Dementia Screening Test's (BDST) full and short versions: brief screening instruments for geriatric patients that are suitable for infectious environments.

Wolfgang Trapp, Susanne Röder, Andreas Heid, Pia Billman, Susanne Daiber, Göran Hajak

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Validation of the Italian version of the In-Person Telephone Interview for Cognitive Status (IP-TICS).Neurological sciences : official journal of the Italian Neurological Society and of the Italian Society of Clinical Neurophysiology · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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

6 authors.

Wolfgang TrappDepartment of Psychiatry, Sozialstiftung Bamberg, St-.Getreu-Straße 18, 96049, Bamberg, Germany. wolfgang.trapp@sozialstiftung-bamberg.de.ORCID 0000-0003-4066-3258
Susanne RöderDepartment of Psychiatry, Sozialstiftung Bamberg, St-.Getreu-Straße 18, 96049, Bamberg, Germany.
Andreas HeidDepartment of Psychiatry, Sozialstiftung Bamberg, St-.Getreu-Straße 18, 96049, Bamberg, Germany.
Pia BillmanDepartment of Psychiatry, Sozialstiftung Bamberg, St-.Getreu-Straße 18, 96049, Bamberg, Germany.
Susanne DaiberDepartment of Geriatric Rehabilitation, Sozialstiftung Bamberg, St-.Getreu-Straße 18, 96049, Bamberg, Germany.
Göran HajakDepartment of Psychiatry, Sozialstiftung Bamberg, St-.Getreu-Straße 18, 96049, Bamberg, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCurrently, many patients suffering from dementia do not have a diagnosis when admitted to geriatric hospitals. This is the case despite an increased risk of complications affecting the length of stay and outcome. Unfortunately, many dementia screening tests cannot be used on geriatric inpatients, who are often bedridden. Therefore, we aimed at evaluating the diagnostic accuracy of a small battery of bedside tasks that require minimal vision and fine motor skills in patients with suspected dementia.

methodsIn this prospective study, the Bamberg Dementia Screening Test (BDST) was administered to a consecutive series of 1295 patients referred for neuropsychological testing. The diagnosis of dementia was confirmed in 1159 and excluded in 136 patients. Sensitivity and specificity for the first subtest (ultra-short form), the first two subtests (short form), and the total score of the BDST were obtained via receiver operating characteristic curves and compared with the sensitivity and specificity values of the Mini-Mental Status Examination (MMSE).

resultsThe overall diagnostic quality of the BDST was superior to the MMSE for mild Alzheimer's dementia (sensitivity and specificity = .94 (95% CI .92 to .96) and .82 (95% CI .75 to .88) vs. .79 (95% CI .76 to .83) and .88 (95% CI .82 to .93)) as well as for other subtypes of mild dementia (sensitivity and specificity = .91 (95% CI .88 to .94) and .82 (95% CI .75 to .88) vs. .72 (95% CI .67 to .76) and .88 (95% CI .82 to .93)). Even the short form of the BDST was comparable to the MMSE regarding sensitivity and specificity. For moderate dementia, it was possible to identify dementia cases with sufficient and excellent diagnostic quality by using the ultra-short and the short form.

conclusionsThe BDST is able to detect dementia in geriatric hospital settings. If the adaptive algorithm is used, administration time can be reduced to less than 2 min in most cases. Because no test materials have to be exchanged, this test is particularly suitable for infectious environments where contact between the examiner and the person being tested should be minimized.

Indexed as

AgedDementiaEarly Detection of CancerFemaleHumansMaleNeuropsychological TestsProspective StudiesSensitivity and SpecificityAlzheimer’s diseaseDementiaDiagnosticGeriatricsMemoryScreening testSensitivitySpecificity

Identifiers

PMID33663471
PMCPMC7934397

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.