Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38131467›Full record

ArticlePsychogeriatrics : the official journal of the Japanese Psychogeriatric Society2024

Examining the validity of the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) and its domains using network analysis.

Quoc Cuong Truong, Matti Cervin, Carol C Choo, Katya Numbers, Adam C Bentvelzen, Nicole A Kochan, Henry Brodaty, Perminder S Sachdev, Oleg N Medvedev

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Psychogeriatrics : the official journal of the Japanese Psychogeriatric Society, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 36 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
36citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Observational
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Observational
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

9 authors.

Quoc Cuong TruongUniversity of Waikato, School of Psychology, Hamilton, New Zealand.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3876-129X
Matti CervinDepartment of Clinical Sciences Lund, Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, Faculty of Medicine, Lund University, Lund, Sweden.
Carol C ChooCollege of Healthcare Sciences, James Cook University, Townsville, Queensland, Australia.
Katya NumbersCentre for Healthy Brain Ageing (CHeBA), School of Psychiatry, University of New South Wales, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Adam C BentvelzenCentre for Healthy Brain Ageing (CHeBA), School of Psychiatry, University of New South Wales, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Nicole A KochanCentre for Healthy Brain Ageing (CHeBA), School of Psychiatry, University of New South Wales, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Henry BrodatyCentre for Healthy Brain Ageing (CHeBA), School of Psychiatry, University of New South Wales, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Perminder S SachdevCentre for Healthy Brain Ageing (CHeBA), School of Psychiatry, University of New South Wales, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Oleg N MedvedevUniversity of Waikato, School of Psychology, Hamilton, New Zealand.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) is the most widely used standardised screener for impairments across a range of cognitive domains. However, the degree to which its domains (orientation, registration, attention, recall, language, and visuospatial) capture cognitive functioning measured using standardised neuropsychological tests is unclear.

methodA longitudinal research design with four biannual assessments over a 6-year period was used with an initial sample of 1037 older adults (aged above 70 years). Participants completed MMSE and neuropsychological tests at each assessment. Network analysis was utilised to investigate unique associations among the MMSE and its domains and neuropsychological test performance at each time point.

resultsThe total MMSE and two of its domains, language and recall, were associated with neuropsychological memory performance. The MMSE orientation, registration and visuospatial domains did not have any unique associations with neuropsychological performance. No stable internal interconnections between MMSE domains were found over time. The association of total MMSE as well as its recall domain with neuropsychological memory performance remained very similar over the 6-year period.

conclusionsThe present study adds evidence to the validity of the MMSE and supports the clinical usage of the MMSE, whereby the total score is used for screening patients with or without cognitive impairments, with repeated administration to monitor cognitive changes over time, to inform intervention. However, the tool is not able to diagnose the cases for changes in specific cognitive domains and as such, should not replace a complete neuropsychological assessment.

Indexed as

Cognition DisordersCognitive DysfunctionAgedCognitionHumansMental Status and Dementia TestsNeuropsychological Testscognitive domainsMini-Mental State Examinationnetwork analysisneuropsychological assessments

Identifiers

PMID38131467
PMCPMC11577997

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.