Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37272617›Full record

ArticleBJPsych bulletin2024

Cut-off scores for mild and moderate dementia on the Addenbrooke's Cognitive Examination-III and the Mini-Addenbrooke's Cognitive Examination compared with the Mini-Mental State Examination.

Louise McCarthy, Judy Rubinsztein, Ellen Lowry, Emma Flanagan, Vandana Menon, Silvia Vearncombe, Eneida Mioshi, Michael Hornberger

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BJPsych bulletin, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Catecholaminergic nucleus integrity and Alzheimer's pathology, symptoms, and progression.Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association · 2025
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
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

8 authors.

Louise McCarthyNorfolk and Suffolk NHS Foundation Trust, Norwich, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6321-3810
Judy RubinszteinCambridge and Peterborough NHS Foundation Trust, Cambridge, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1466-3553
Ellen LowryNorwich Medical School, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK.
Emma FlanaganNorwich Medical School, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK.
Vandana MenonCambridge and Peterborough NHS Foundation Trust, Cambridge, UK.
Silvia VearncombeCambridge and Peterborough NHS Foundation Trust, Cambridge, UK.
Eneida MioshiSchool of Health Sciences, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK.
Michael HornbergerNorwich Medical School, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

AIMS AND

methodWe aimed to establish cut-off scores to stage dementia on the Addenbrooke's Cognitive Examination-III (ACE-III) and the Mini-Addenbrooke's Cognitive Examination (M-ACE) compared with scores traditionally used with the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE). Our cross-sectional study recruited 80 patients and carers from secondary care services in the UK.

resultsA score ≤76 on the ACE-III and ≤19 on the M-ACE correlated well with MMSE cut-offs for mild dementia, with a good fit on the receiver operating characteristic analysis for both the ACE-III and M-ACE. The cut-off for moderate dementia had lower sensitivity and specificity. There were low to moderate correlations between the cognitive scales and scales for everyday functioning and behaviour. CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: Our findings allow an objective interpretation of scores on the ACE-III and the M-ACE relative to the MMSE, which may be helpful for clinical services and research trials.

Indexed as

Carerscommunity mental health teamsdementiapsychological testingrating scales

Identifiers

PMID37272617
PMCPMC10801363

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.