ArticleBMC geriatrics2026
Validation of the Arabic version of the short 10/66 dementia diagnostic schedule for the Lebanese population.
Article in BMC geriatrics, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundAs dementia becomes a major health concern, developing a quick and accurate diagnostic tool is crucial for early detection and intervention in resource-limited settings. This paper aims to validate the short 10/66 algorithm against the clinical diagnosis of dementia in a sample of older adults in Lebanon.
methodsThis study is a secondary analysis of data from the Lebanese validation of the standard 10/66 dementia assessment, evaluating the diagnostic accuracy of the Arabic short 10/66 algorithm against a clinical reference standard. 231 participants aged 65 + were recruited from institutions and their dwellings, including geriatric clinics and community-based primary care centers. Clinical dementia diagnosis followed DSM-IV criteria. The final sample included 88 cases (diagnosed with mild to moderate dementia) and 143 controls. The short algorithm used is derived from the Community Screening Instrument for Dementia, the CERAD 10-word list recall and the Euro-D. The psychometric parameters of sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), Negative Predictive Value (NPV), false positive rate (FPR), and area under the curve (AUC) were estimated for the short 10/66 algorithm and its subcomponents.
resultsCompared to clinical diagnosis, the short 10/66 showed high specificity (95.1%), good sensitivity (79.5%), excellent PPV (90.9%), high NPV (88.3%), low FPR (4.9%), and substantial agreement between the two (AUC = 0.97, kappa = 0.765).
conclusionThe short 10/66 is accurate and feasible for the diagnosis of dementia in the older Lebanese population, offering a practical tool with a lower time requirement that is adaptable to different literacy levels. Interpretation of predictive values should consider the enriched sampling design, and performance should be further assessed in lower prevalence community settings.
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.