ArticleInternational journal of environmental research and public health2023
Validation of a Harmonised, Three-Item Cognitive Screening Instrument for the Survey of Health, Ageing and Retirement in Europe (SHARE-Cog).
Article in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Latent Profiles Based on Combined Risk Factors for Cognitive Decline in European Older Adults: A Retrospective Study Based on the SHARE HCAP Project.Neurology international · 2025Article
- Development of a digital memory and learning test for elderly individuals.BMC geriatrics · 2025Article
- Correlation between physical activity levels and the risk of cognitive impairment in Chinese older adults.Frontiers in aging neuroscience · 2025Article
- Sex differences in the association between cognitive function and 24-hour activity patterns in older adults: a compositional data analysis.Frontiers in aging · 2025Article
- Cognitive abilities and internet use among older adults in the Czech Republic and Slovenia.Digital healthArticle
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
More accurate and standardised screening and assessment instruments are needed for studies to better understand the epidemiology of mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and dementia in Europe. The Survey of Health, Ageing and Retirement in Europe (SHARE) does not have a harmonised multi-domain cognitive test available. The current study proposes and validates a new instrument, the SHARE cognitive instrument (SHARE-Cog), for this large European longitudinal cohort. Three cognitive domains/sub-tests were available across all main waves of the SHARE and incorporated into SHARE-Cog; these included 10-word registration, verbal fluency (animal naming) and 10-word recall. Subtests were weighted using regression analysis. Diagnostic accuracy was assessed from the area under the curve (AUC) of receiver operating characteristic curves. Diagnostic categories included normal cognition (NC), subjective memory complaints (SMC), MCI and dementia. A total of 20,752 participants were included from wave 8, with a mean age of 75 years; 55% were female. A 45-point SHARE-Cog was developed and validated and had excellent diagnostic accuracy for identifying dementia (AUC = 0.91); very good diagnostic accuracy for cognitive impairment (MCI + dementia), (AUC = 0.81); and good diagnostic accuracy for distinguishing MCI from dementia (AUC = 0.76) and MCI from SMC + NC (AUC = 0.77). SHARE-Cog is a new, short cognitive screening instrument developed and validated to assess cognition in the SHARE. In this cross-sectional analysis, it has good-excellent diagnostic accuracy for identifying cognitive impairment in this wave of SHARE, but further study is required to confirm this in previous waves and over time.
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.