Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40895819›Full record

ArticleGlobal mental health (Cambridge, England)2025

The concordance between the Montreal cognitive assessment and the repeatable battery for the assessment of neuropsychological status as a cognitive screening tool in a south African community sample.

Sharain Suliman, Erine Bröcker, Natalie Beath, Leigh L Van den Heuvel, Laila Asmal, Sanja Kilian, Robin Emsley, Jonatha Carr, Soraya Seedat

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Global mental health (Cambridge, England), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
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.

Sharain SulimanDepartment of Psychiatry, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Stellenbosch University, Cape Town, South Africa.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5510-3128
Erine BröckerDepartment of Psychiatry, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Stellenbosch University, Cape Town, South Africa.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9861-9527
Natalie BeathDepartment of Psychiatry, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Stellenbosch University, Cape Town, South Africa.
Leigh L Van den HeuvelDepartment of Psychiatry, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Stellenbosch University, Cape Town, South Africa.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3884-4754
Laila AsmalDepartment of Psychiatry, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Stellenbosch University, Cape Town, South Africa.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6923-6746
Sanja KilianDepartment of Psychiatry, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Stellenbosch University, Cape Town, South Africa.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4649-8388
Robin EmsleyDepartment of Psychiatry, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Stellenbosch University, Cape Town, South Africa.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1250-6888
Jonatha CarrSouth African Medical Research Council Unit on the Genomics of Brain Disorders, Department of Psychiatry, Stellenbosch University, Cape Town, South Africa.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7677-426X
Soraya SeedatDepartment of Psychiatry, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Stellenbosch University, Cape Town, South Africa.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5118-786X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

We aimed to compare the concordance between the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) and the Repeatable Battery for the Assessment of Neuropsychological Status (RBANS), as cognitive screening tools to detect mild cognitive impairment (MCI) in a South African adult community sample (

Indexed as

concordanceMoCARBANSSouth Africa

Identifiers

PMID40895819
PMCPMC12394016

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.