ArticlePsychogeriatrics : the official journal of the Japanese Psychogeriatric Society2022
Comparison of Rapid Cognitive Screen against Montreal Cognitive Assessment in screening for cognitive impairment in the old and old-old.
Article in Psychogeriatrics : the official journal of the Japanese Psychogeriatric Society, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Ten-words recall test: an effective tool to differentiate mild cognitive impairment from subjective cognitive decline.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2024Article
- Healthy aging and chronic kidney disease.Kidney research and clinical practice · 2022Article
- The impact of 24-hour sleep deprivation on cognition and inflammatory response in anesthesiologists and nurses in operating rooms.Saudi journal of anaesthesiaArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) was developed as a screening tool for mild cognitive impairment (MCI). Given the need for a rapid screening test in settings such as primary care, we compare the validity of the Rapid Cognitive Screen (RCS) against the MoCA, and determine cut-off scores in the old and old-old.
methodsCross-sectional study involving community-dwelling 'old' (65 to 79 years old) and 'old-old' (≥ 80 years old) without dementia. Cognitive impairment was defined by MoCA score 17 to 22. Validation was done using the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis: area under the curve (AUC), sensitivity (Sn), and specificity (Sp).
resultsOf the 183 participants (mean age 72.1 ± 5.2 years),15.8% (n = 29) were classified as cognitively impaired. The overall ROC curve had an AUC of 0.82 (95% CI 0.75-0.90, P < 0.01) with an optimal cut-off of 7/8 on RCS (Sn 0.77, Sp 0.72). The 'old' and 'old-old' group had AUC of 0.82 (95% CI 0.74-0.91, P < 0.01) with 8/9 as optimal cut-off (Sn 0.51, Sp 0.96) and AUC of 0.85 (95% CI 0.66-1.03, P < 0.01) with 7/8 as optimal cut-off (Sn 0.71, Sp 1.00) respectively. In multivariate analysis, age was associated with 0.05 (95% CI -0.10-0.00, P < 0.04) point decrement, while >6 years of education was associated with 0.82 (95% CI 0.32-1.33, P < 0.01) point increment in RCS scores.
conclusionThe three-item RCS is quick and easy to administer. Although RCS met the criterion for good validity against MoCA in predicting cognitive impairment, its utility as a first-line screening tool needs to be further validated in a large-scale population study.
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.