SynthesisBMC psychiatry2022
A systematic review and meta-analysis of studies on screening for mild cognitive impairment in primary healthcare.
Synthesis in BMC psychiatry, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 33 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
33 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 55 citations in OpenAlex.
- Understanding barriers to and facilitators of clinician-patient conversations about brain health and cognitive concerns in primary care: a systematic review and practical considerations for the clinician.BMC primary care · 2023Pooled it
- Cognitive Impairment Associated with Chemotherapy: Neuroimmunological Interactions, Gut-Brain Axis, and Therapeutic Approaches.Brain sciences · 2026Review
- Longitudinal Cognitive Recovery After Critical Illness: Trajectories in Sepsis and Non-Sepsis Survivors.Journal of intensive care medicine · 2026Article
- Diagnostic accuracy of digital clock drawing test for Alzheimer disease and mild cognitive impairment.NPJ digital medicine · 2026Article
- Eligibility for amyloid targeting therapies among primary care patients with cognitive symptoms.Alzheimer's research & therapy · 2026Article
- Validation of a Web-Based Digit Symbol Substitution Task for Detection of Mild Cognitive Impairment in Older Adults.Archives of clinical neuropsychology : the official journal of the National Academy of Neuropsychologists · 2026Article
- The interaction between illness perception and intrinsic capacity during hospital-to-home transition in older adults with COPD and diabetes: a prospective cohort study.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- MMSE in primary care practice: why good tests can mislead in the wrong context.European journal of ageing · 2025Article
- A bayesian network model for neurocognitive disorders digital screening in Chinese population: development and validation study.BMC psychiatry · 2025Article
- The Impact of Cognitive Impairment on Cardiovascular Disease.Journal of the American College of Cardiology · 2025Review
- Frailty in motion: Amnestic mild cognitive impairment and Alzheimer's disease cohorts display heterogeneity in multimorbidity classification and longitudinal transitions.Journal of Alzheimer's disease : JAD · 2025Article
- Comparing Short Cognitive Screening Instruments in an Outreach Memory Clinic in Primary Care.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2025Article
- Character-level linguistic biomarkers for precision assessment of cognitive decline: a symbolic recurrence approach.Frontiers in aging neuroscience · 2025Article
- CharMark: character-level Markov modeling for interpretable linguistic biomarkers of cognitive decline.Frontiers in digital health · 2025Article
- Influencing factors of health utility values in older adult people with normal cognition or mild cognitive impairment: a cross-sectional survey.Frontiers in public health · 2025Article
- Is the MMSE enough for MCI? A narrative review of the usefulness of the MMSE.Frontiers in psychology · 2025Review
- Investigating the factor structure of the Montreal Cognitive Assessment: a qualitative review.Frontiers in psychology · 2025Review
- [Brain check-up: a structured approach diagnosing mild cognitive impairment in the primary care setting].Zeitschrift fur Gerontologie und Geriatrie · 2024Article
- Prediction Model for Cognitive Impairment among Disabled Older Adults: A Development and Validation Study.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Development and validation of a self-administered computerized cognitive assessment based on automatic speech recognition.PloS one · 2024Article
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
backgroundCognitive disorders and dementia have an important effect on individual independence and orientation. According to the Alzheimer's Disease International (ADI) 75% of people with dementia are not diagnosed; this may be as high as 90% in some low- and middle-income countries. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to identify the test performance of screening tools and compare them pairwise. The findings of our study can support countries in planning to establish and care for mild cognitive impairment in primary health centers.
methodsMedline (PubMed), Scopus, Cochrane, Dare, All EBM Reviews, CRD (OVID), and Proquest were searched from 2012 to November 2021. The risk of bias was assessed through the QUADAS-2 instrument. Given the high heterogeneity between studies, a random-effects model was used to calculate the pooled effect sizes for diagnostic accuracy measures (sensitivity, specificity, and area under curve indices). I
resultsA systematic search identified 18,132 records, of which, 20 studies were included in the quality assessment, and six were included in quantitative analysis. None of the studies had examined the feasibility or efficiency of mass screening. According to a pairwise comparison, IQCODE, AD8 and GPCOG showed equal or better diagnostic performance relative to the MMSE in terms of sensitivity and specificity. The random-effect model for the MMSE showed the pooled sensitivity equal to 0.73 (95% CI 0.57-0.90), the pooled specificity equal to 0.83 (95% CI 0.75-0.90), and the pooled AUC equal to 0.88 (95% CI 0.83-0.93).
conclusionSeveral benefits have been attached to short tests making them a suitable choice for use in primary healthcare settings. Considering factors such as accuracy, time of application, ease of scoring, and utilization charges, tests such as IQCODE, AD8, and GPCOG or appropriate combination with counterpart tools seem to be good alternatives to the use of the MMSE in primary care.
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.