SynthesisAlzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association2025
Cognitive assessment tools for Arabic-speaking older adults: A systematic review.
Synthesis in Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Cognitive assessment tools for Arabic-speaking older adults: A systematic review.Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association · 2025Pooled it
- A three-biomarker panel for frailty prediction and risk stratification in institutionalized older adults: a multicenter validation study.European geriatric medicine · 2026Article
- Recommended best practices for construct-centered adaptation of the Harmonized Cognitive Assessment Protocol.The journals of gerontology. Series B, Psychological sciences and social sciences · 2026Article
- Automated MoCA scoring for Arabic speakers using hybrid AI of multimodal speech, vision, and LLM integration.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Article
- Occupational Therapy Neurorehabilitation Practice in Middle East and North Africa (MENA): A Scoping Review.Occupational therapy international · 2026Article
- Cohort profile: the Lebanon Study on Aging and HeAlth (LSAHA).BMC public health · 2025Article
- Cohort Profile: The Lebanon Study on Aging and HeAlth (LSAHA).Research square · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
This systematic review aims to identify available cognitive assessments for Arabic-speaking older adults and to assess their validity and performance. A comprehensive search was conducted using Medline, Embase, and APA PsycInfo up to November 2023, encompassing studies validating or using cognitive tools in Arabic for individuals aged ≥ 50. We identified 29 validation studies for 20 cognitive tools and 125 studies using cognitive tools. Three tools were validated in more than one study/setting. Cut-offs for dementia were validated for 16 tools (including two domain-specific tools) and for cognitive impairment for three tools. The Mini-Mental State Examination and Montreal Cognitive Assessment were the most frequently validated and used tools. The results highlight a large need for improved psychometric data for cognitive assessments for Arabic-speaking older adults and identify important gaps in knowledge regarding domain-specific tools, the detection of cognitive changes, and the suitability of assessments across different settings and subgroups. HIGHLIGHTS: We reviewed the availability and properties of cognitive assessments in Arabic. Psychometric data on cognitive tools for older Arabic-speaking adults are scarce. Only three tools are validated in more than one study/setting. Data are largely lacking for domain-specific tools and early cognitive changes. The review identifies important methodology, reporting, and reproducibility issues.
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.