Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35997360›Full record

ArticleNeurology international2022

Self-Awareness of Cognitive Efficiency, Cognitive Status, Insight, and Financial Capacity in Patients with Mild AD, aMCI, and Healthy Controls: An Intriguing Liaison with Clinical Implications?

Vaitsa Giannouli, Magdalini Tsolaki

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Neurology international, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing 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

11 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. 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

2 authors.

Vaitsa GiannouliSchool of Medicine, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, 54124 Thessaloniki, Greece.
Magdalini TsolakiSchool of Medicine, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, 54124 Thessaloniki, Greece.ORCID 0000-0002-2072-8010

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesThis study compares objective measures of cognitive performance with subjective perception of specific performance on neuropsychological tests examining basic cognitive domains, including, for the first time, financial capacity. Additionally, differences in assessment between single- and multiple-domain aMCI, mild AD, and healthy elderly regarding insight are examined.

methodsParticipants completed a number of neuropsychological tests and the Legal Capacity for Property Law Transactions Assessment Scale (LCPLTAS). After every test, participants were asked to complete the Clinical Insight Rating scale (CIR) and to self-evaluate their performance by comparing it to what they considered as average for people of their age and educational level.

resultsThese preliminary findings show significant differences in the self-assessment patterns of the four groups in measures of verbal memory, visuospatial perception and memory, executive functions, tests of attention, and financial capacity. Mild AD expressed the highest overestimations, followed by single- and multiple-domain aMCI as well as controls. Accuracy of self-report is not uniform across groups and functional areas.

conclusionsUnawareness of memory deficits in both MCI subtypes is contradictory to subjective memory complaints as being an important component for clinical diagnosis. Financial capacity is overestimated in MCI and mild AD, a finding that has a plethora of clinical and legal implications.

Indexed as

ADaMCIcognitive assessmentfinancial capacityinsightself-assessmentself-awareness

Identifiers

PMID35997360
PMCPMC9396975

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.