Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35748730›Full record

ArticleEuropean journal of neurology2022

Validation of a "subjective motoric cognitive risk syndrome" screening tool for motoric cognitive risk syndrome-A prospective cohort study.

Emmeline Ayers, Cuiling Wang, Joe Verghese

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in European journal of neurology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.4field-weighted citation impact, top 6% 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

17 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 23 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. "Cognitive" Criteria in Older Adults With Slow Gait Speed: Implications for Motoric Cognitive Risk Syndrome.The journals of gerontology. Series A, Biological sciences and medical sciences · 2024
    Review
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. 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

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Emmeline AyersDepartment of Neurology, Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Bronx, New York, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-5061-3708
Cuiling WangDepartment of Epidemiology and Population Health, Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Bronx, New York, USA.
Joe VergheseDepartment of Neurology, Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Bronx, New York, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-4252-2547
Albert Einstein College of Medicine · US

Funding

The biological underpinnings of Motoric Cognitive Risk syndrome: a multi-center studyR01AG057548 · NIA · ALBERT EINSTEIN COLLEGE OF MEDICINE · PI VERGHESE, JOE · 2020 to 2024
$8.0M
Biological and neural mechanisms of fallsR01AG044007 · NIA · ALBERT EINSTEIN COLLEGE OF MEDICINE, INC · PI VERGHESE, JOE · 2013 to 2017
$3.5M
Central Control of Mobility in AgingR01AG036921 · NIA · ALBERT EINSTEIN COLLEGE OF MEDICINE, INC · PI HOLTZER, ROEE · 2011 to 2015
$3.3M
NIA NIH HHS R01 AG036921NIA NIH HHS R01 AG044007NIA NIH HHS R01 AG057548
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

background and purposeMotoric cognitive risk syndrome (MCR) is a gait-based pre-dementia syndrome associated with risk of dementia. Ascertaining subjective cognitive and motoric complaints may facilitate early and remote identification of individuals with MCR as they are reported to precede and predict objective cognitive and motoric impairments in aging.

methodsThe validity of five subjective motoric complaint (SMC) questions and 10 subjective cognitive complaint (SCC) questions was examined for discriminating MCR in 538 non-demented community-dwelling adults. Backward logistic regression was used to identify questions to develop a weighted score to define subjective MCR (MCR-S). Receiver operating characteristic analysis was applied to determine the discriminative ability of MCR-S for the objective MCR (MCR-O) definition based on SCCs and objectively measured gait. Cox proportional hazard models adjusted for potential confounders were used to examine the predictive validity of MCR-S for incident dementia.

resultsFive subjective complaint questions (three SCC and two SMC) were associated with MCR-O. They were combined to define an MCR-S score (range 0-7) which yielded an area under the curve of 0.89 for discriminating MCR-O from receiver operating characteristic analysis. An optimal cut-score of 2 on the MCR-S score was determined to have good sensitivity (84%) and specificity (82%) for MCR-O. Over a median follow-up of 2.5 years, 29 participants developed dementia. Both MCR-S (adjusted hazard ratio 2.39) and MCR-O at baseline (adjusted hazard ratio 3.16) predicted risk of incident dementia.

conclusionsSubjective MCR had high concordance with MCR-O and can provide a remote screening assessment for MCR-O, which can identify those at high risk for dementia.

Indexed as

Cognition DisordersCognitive DysfunctionDementiaCognitionHumansNeuropsychological TestsProspective StudiesRisk FactorsSyndromeclassificationcognitiondementiaepidemiologygait

Identifiers

PMID35748730
PMCPMC9875832
OpenAlexW4283447212

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.