ArticleJournal of cross-cultural gerontology2026
Cognitive Screening Variability by English Proficiency: A Multi-group Confirmatory Factor Analysis Using the National Health and Aging Trends Study Cognitive Screening Battery.
Article in Journal of cross-cultural gerontology, 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
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective cognitive tasks in the National Health and Aging Trends Study (NHATS) are used to classify probable dementia in Medicare beneficiaries. Whether these tasks measure the same latent construct with comparable precision across English-proficiency groups has not been established. While the NHATS offers English and Spanish versions, it remains unclear whether translation alone achieves measurement equivalence. This study tests measurement invariance of the NHATS cognitive screening battery across English-language-proficient (ELP) and limited English-proficient (LEP) groups to determine whether noninvariance produces measurement bias that could misclassify probable dementia and distort prevalence estimates. Methods round 12 (2021) of the NHATS (N = 5,628) data were analyzed using a multi-group confirmatory factor analysis that incorporated the complex survey design. Factor loadings were constrained equal across ELP and LEP groups, and differences in factor (latent) variance and item residual variances were used to assess measurement noninvariance. Results all standardized indicators loaded positively on the cognition factor (p < .001). The factor (latent) variance was larger in ELP (1.80) than LEP (1.49). Residual (error) variances were higher in LEP, especially for clock drawing (ELP 0.87 vs. LEP 1.38) and name recall (ELP 1.07 vs. LEP 2.63), indicating lower measurement precision in the LEP group. Discussion these findings indicate that the NHATS cognitive screening battery does not measure the same construct with equal precision across English-proficiency groups, suggesting that translation alone is insufficient to ensure measurement invariance. Larger factor (latent) variance in ELP and higher residual (error) variance in LEP suggest lower measurement reliability and possible cultural bias in item interpretation. Such differences may lead to misclassification of probable dementia and distort population estimates. These results highlight the need for culturally and linguistically adapted cognitive screening tools to improve the validity of dementia surveillance and research.
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.