ArticleInternational journal of geriatric psychiatry2025
Development of the Clinical Insight Questionnaire: A Novel Clinical Tool for the Assessment of Insight Into Cognitive Symptoms and Everyday Functioning in People With Neurodegeneration.
Article in International journal of geriatric psychiatry, 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.
- Care challenges related to lack of awareness in people with dementia.Frontiers in dementia · 2026Article
- Development of the Clinical Insight Questionnaire: A Novel Clinical Tool for the Assessment of Insight Into Cognitive Symptoms and Everyday Functioning in People With Neurodegeneration.International journal of geriatric psychiatry · 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
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesAltered insight into cognitive symptoms and diagnosis is a common feature of neurodegeneration, and can adversely impact on quality of life and ability to access medical care. Affected individuals can lose awareness of their symptoms and therefore decline to engage with medical assessment and treatment. Assessing insight is difficult, and there is a lack of short, easily administered clinical assessment tools. The aim of this study was to develop and evaluate the feasibility of a novel insight assessment questionnaire (The Clinical Insight Questionnaire, CLIQ) which can be independently completed by adults with a range of cognitive abilities.
methodsA discrepancy score approach was used to evaluate insight. A novel questionnaire targeting the domains of memory, personality and social behaviour, executive function, language, and activities of daily living was devised using the Delphi approach and public feedback. Participant and informant mirror versions of each item were written. The discrepancy between participant and informant scores provides an overall insight score. 12 UK based experts in cognitive disorder diagnosis and assessment were invited to review potential questionnaire items, as was a PPI group. A feasibility study was conducted where people with mild memory or thinking symptoms and an informant completed the questionnaire and the Montreal Cognitive Assessment.
resultsFollowing an iterative process using the expert Delphi group and public feedback, 20 final questionnaire items were selected from an initial pool of 30 items. 21 people with mild cognitive symptoms but no formally diagnosed cognitive disorder (median MoCA score 24.5) participated in feasibility testing. The mean discrepancy score was 1.14, close to the ideal score of zero. No participants found the assessment upsetting or too long, and 81% rated the questions as easy to understand.
conclusionsThe Clinical Insight Questionnaire (CLIQ) is a novel clinical tool for the assessment of insight in people with mild to moderate neurodegeneration. In feasibility testing it was quick and easy for people with mild cognitive symptoms and informants to self-complete. Initial feasibility testing showed very promising findings for usability and acceptability, and a full validation study is now in progress.
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.