Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35784243›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in public health2022

Psychometric Properties and Measurement Invariance of the Chinese Version of the Brief Assessment of Impaired Cognition Questionnaire in Community-Dwelling Older Adults.

Shaojie Li, Guanghui Cui, Kasper Jørgensen, Zimi Cheng, Zihao Li, Huilan Xu

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in public health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Conversion between the Brief assessment of Impaired Cognition, Brief Assessment of Impaired Cognition Questionnaire, and Mini-Mental State Examination in a mixed clinical sample.Neurological sciences : official journal of the Italian Neurological Society and of the Italian Society of Clinical Neurophysiology · 2026
    Article
  2. Validation of the brief assessment of impaired cognition (BASIC) and brief assessment of impaired cognition questionnaire (BASIC-Q) in Italy.Neurological sciences : official journal of the Italian Neurological Society and of the Italian Society of Clinical Neurophysiology · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. 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.

Shaojie LiXiangya School of Public Health, Central South University, Changsha, China.
Guanghui CuiDepartment of Integrated Traditional Chinese and Western Medicine, Peking University First Hospital, Beijing, China.
Kasper JørgensenDanish Dementia Research Centre, Department of Neurology, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Zimi ChengWest China School of Public Health and West China Fourth Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
Zihao LiXiangya School of Public Health, Central South University, Changsha, China.
Huilan XuXiangya School of Public Health, Central South University, Changsha, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This study aimed to verify the Chinese version of the Brief Assessment of Impaired Cognition Questionnaire (C-BASIC-Q), and provide a new tool for the future large-scale epidemiological investigation of cognitive function in China. From March to May 2021, a cross-sectional study of 2,144 Chinese community-dwelling older adults (men = 1,075, mean age = 72.01 years,

Indexed as

CognitionIndependent LivingAgedChinaCross-Sectional StudiesHumansMalePsychometricsReproducibility of ResultsSurveys and QuestionnairesChinacognitive functionmeasurement invarianceolder adultsreliabilityvalidation

Identifiers

PMID35784243
PMCPMC9247353

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.