Observational studyDementia and geriatric cognitive disorders2025
Screening for Cognitive Impairment in the Emergency Department: Agreement between Older Adult Patient- and Informant-Completed Ascertain Dementia 8 Tool.
Observational study in Dementia and geriatric cognitive disorders, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Recruiting People With Dementia in Emergency Research: Insights From Geriatric Emergency Care Applied Research 2.0 Network (GEAR 2.0) Pilot Studies.Academic emergency medicine : official journal of the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine · 2026Article
- Development and validation of the Caregiver-reported Outcome Measure for Emergency care Transitions (COMET) tool.Alzheimer's & dementia. Behavior & socioeconomics of aging · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionEmergency department (ED) screening for cognitive impairment (CI) is crucial for early intervention, yet guidance on dementia screening protocols remains limited. Our objective was to assess the concordance between the Ascertain Dementia 8 (AD8) tool, a brief screening tool for CI, administered to ED patients and their informants.
methodsWe conducted a prospective observational study of dyads, including patients ≥65 years without a diagnosis of dementia seeking care in the ED and their informants (e.g., family, friend with close contact). Trained research assistants used the 4AT to exclude patients with concern for delirium. The AD8 was then administered to blinded patients (pAD8) and informants (iAD8), with scores ranging from 0 to 8 and scores of ≥2 indicating CI. We used the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) to calculate the level of agreement between AD8 scores.
resultsOur analytic sample included 538 dyads, of which 63.3% of patients were female with a mean age of 73.5 years. A total of 131 (24.3%) patients without a diagnosis of dementia self-identified as having CI using the pAD8, in comparison to 110 (20.4%) informants using the iAD8. The ICC of 0.519 (95% CI 0.454-0.578) indicated moderate agreement between pAD8 and iAD8 scores.
conclusionsWhen seeking emergency care, one in four older adults without a diagnosis of dementia and approximately 20% of informants indicated that patients were cognitively impaired. Our finding of moderate agreement between the pAD8 and iAD8 has important implications for clinicians providing care to patients with suspected CI and investigators conducting dementia-related studies.
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.