Observational studyJournal of Alzheimer's disease : JAD2022
A Comparison of Operational Definitions for Mild Cognitive Impairment.
Observational study in Journal of Alzheimer's disease : JAD, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Assessing the prevalence of cognitive impairment among Australians with schizophrenia: A systematic review.The Australian and New Zealand journal of psychiatry · 2026Pooled it
- Exploring blood-based biomarkers in late-life depression: Correlates of psychotherapeutic treatment outcomes.European psychiatry : the journal of the Association of European Psychiatrists · 2026Trial
- Single- versus two-test criteria for cognitive impairment: associations with CSF and imaging markers in former American football players.The Clinical neuropsychologist · 2025Article
- Examining Technology Perspectives of Older Adults With Mild Cognitive Impairment: Scoping Review.JMIR aging · 2025Article
- Relevance of Minor Neuropsychological Deficits in Patients With Subjective Cognitive Decline.Neurology · 2023Observational
- Antihypertensive therapy is associated with improved visuospatial, executive, attention, abstraction, memory, and recall scores on the montreal cognitive assessment in geriatric hypertensive patients.Cerebral circulation - cognition and behavior · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundConsideration of many tests from different cognitive domains in defining mild cognitive impairment (MCI) is clinical routine, but guidelines for a neuropsychological operationalization of MCI are lacking.
objectiveAmong different operational MCI criteria, to identify those which are best in predicting either conversion to dementia, or a biomarker profile indicative for Alzheimer's disease (AD).
methodsMemory clinic patients without dementia (N = 558; mean age = 66; up to 3 years of follow-up; n = 360 with baseline CSF biomarkers) were included in an observational study using most liberal criteria of cognitive impairment. Four operational definitions of MCI were retrospectively applied: 1) amnestic MCI (CERAD word list delayed recall), 2) CERAD total score, 3) comprehensive criteria and 4) base rate corrected CERAD. We compared their accuracy in predicting incident all-cause dementia or AD dementia within three years, or a concurrent CSF Aβ42/tau-ratio indicative of AD.
resultsThe four definitions overlapped considerably, classified 35-58% of the original sample as impaired and were associated with markedly increased PPVs regarding incident all-cause dementia (39-46% versus 26% of the original sample), AD dementia and AD biomarker positivity. The base rate corrected MCI definition had the highest prognostic accuracy.
conclusionhe operational criteria examined seem suitable to specify MCI in memory clinic settings, as they identify subjects at high risk of clinical progression. Depending on the neuropsychological battery in use, one or several of these criteria could help to calibrate the clinical judgment of test results, reduce false-positive decisions, and define risk-enriched groups for clinical trials.
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.