ArticleDementia and geriatric cognitive disorders2025
Validation of an Application-Based Cognitive Screening Test for Older Thai Adults.
Article 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 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Development and validation of an Online Comprehensive Geriatric Screening (O-CGS) Tool.BMC public health · 2026Article
- Web-Based Application for Cognitive and Functional Assessments in Dementia Screening: Mixed Methods, User-Centered Development Approach.JMIR human factors · 2026Article
- Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) Scale: Strengths, Limitations, and Implication for Clinical Practice.Iranian journal of psychiatry · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThe cognitive screening usually requires a face-to-face format, which might limit its use in many circumstances. We aimed to develop a new application-based cognitive screening test (ACST) to serve as an accessible and valid tool in the community.
methodsThe ACST was developed by using paired association and digit span tests. This test was administered to 70 cognitively normal participants, 62 participants with MCI, and 64 participants with dementia. The 2nd edition of the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE-2) and the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) were collected by certified psychologists. The ACST was self-administered by the participants, with a clinician providing instructions for those with dementia or technological limitations. The diagnosis was made according to DSM-5 criteria by an experienced geriatric neurologist blinded to the application score. Content validity, test-retest reliability, interrater reliability, and correlations between application scores and MMSE-2 and MoCA scores were analyzed.
resultsThe sensitivity and specificity for distinguishing cognitively normal participants from non-normal participants were 92.9% and 70%, respectively (cutoff point ≤7). The sensitivity and specificity for distinguishing between the cognitively normal group and the MCI group were 87.1% and 70%, respectively (cut point ≤7). The sensitivity and specificity for distinguishing cognitively normal participants from participants with dementia were 93.8% and 82.9%, respectively (cut point ≤6). A cutoff point ≤6 was considered suitable for participants aged 75 years or older or with 6 or fewer years of education. DISCUSSION: The ACST is an easy-to-use and valid tool for cognitive screening in older Thai adults in clinical practice. Patients with an application score ≤7 are considered to be at risk of cognitive impairment and to require further evaluation.
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.