Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37378012›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in neuroscience2023

A comparison of the five-minute cognitive test with the mini-mental state examination in the elderly for cognitive impairment screening.

Xiaoli Pan, Xiaoqin Cheng, Jie Zhang, Yingfeng Xia, Chunjiu Zhong, Guoqiang Fei

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in neuroscience, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
0.2field-weighted citation impact, top 46% 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

0 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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 at 1 institution in 1 country.

Xiaoli PanDepartment of Neurology, Zhongshan Hospital (Xiamen Branch), Fudan University, Xiamen, Fujian, China.
Xiaoqin ChengDepartment of Neurology, Zhongshan Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai, China.
Jie ZhangDepartment of Neurology, Zhongshan Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai, China.
Yingfeng XiaDepartment of Neurology, Zhongshan Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai, China.
Chunjiu ZhongDepartment of Neurology, Zhongshan Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai, China.
Guoqiang FeiDepartment of Neurology, Zhongshan Hospital (Xiamen Branch), Fudan University, Xiamen, Fujian, China.
Sun Yat-sen University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The five-minute cognitive test (FCT) is a novel cognitive screening method with the quick and reliable merit for detecting cognitive impairment at an early stage. The diagnostic power of FCT in differentiating subjects with cognitive impairment from people with cognition in a normal range was demonstrated effective as that of the Mini-Mental Status Evaluation (MMSE) in a previous cohort study. Here, we analyzed the effect of sociodemographic and health-related factors on FCT performance and further investigated the consistency of FCT. Then, we compared the correlation of subitem scores of FCT or MMSE with a comprehensive battery of neuropsychological tests that focus on specific domains of cognition. Finally, the association of the total FCT scores with the volumes of brain subregions was investigated. There were 360 subjects aged 60 years or above enrolled in this study, including 226 adults with cognitive abilities in normal range, 107 subjects with mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and 27 mild Alzheimer's disease (AD). The results showed that the total FCT scores was negatively associated with increasing age (

Indexed as

Alzheimer’s diseasemagnetic resonance imagingmild cognitive impairmentMMSEreliable and valid cognitive screening test

Identifiers

PMID37378012
PMCPMC10292014
OpenAlexW4380087513

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.