ArticleFrontiers in public health2025
Peruvian validation and standardization of the TabCAT-brain health assessment.
Article in Frontiers in public health, 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 a Brief Digital Cognitive Screening Tool for HIV-associated Neurocognitive Disorder in Lima, Peru.Research square · 2026Article
- The incidence of dementia in populations around the globe.Current opinion in psychiatry · 2026Review
- The feasibility and factor structure of a multi-domain cognitive test battery in older Kenyan adults.NPJ dementia · 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
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Introduction: Detecting cognitive impairment in low-educated and marginalized populations may result in under- or over-estimation of diagnoses due to reliance on non-validated approaches and normative data. This study validates and standardizes TabCAT-BHA for older adults living in the Andean region of Peru using regression-based normalization. Methods: Two hundred fifty-eight participants were assessed with the MMSE, RUDAS, and TabCAT-BHA. Classified as either cognitively healthy or impaired based on Clinical Dementia Rating criteria. Results: By incorporating sex, place of residence, age, and years of education as covariates, the TabCAT-BHA demonstrated greater accuracy in detecting cognitive impairment (AUC = 75.3%) compared to the MMSE (AUC = 66.4%) and RUDAS (AUC = 71.4%). After incorporating only significant sociodemographic predictors, TabCAT-BHA obtained better AUC (77.4%) compared to MMSE (66.6%) and RUDAS (71.9%). Discussion: The TabCAT-BHA proves to be a valid tool for detecting cognitive impairment, and incorporating sociodemographic factors improves its accuracy in marginalized settings of Peru.
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.