ArticleHealth & justice2026
Performance of cognitive screening tools in detecting possible dementia among older males in custody in Canada: a pilot study.
Article in Health & justice, 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
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundOlder individuals represent a growing demographic in correctional institutions worldwide, many of whom are living with complex health and social needs. One area of concern is that older people in custody are at increased risk of developing, or are currently living with, neurocognitive issues such as dementia. This pilot study examined the preliminary diagnostic performance of several cognitive screening tools for detecting suspected cases of dementia when compared with a formal diagnostic assessment among older people in custody at a multi-level forensic psychiatric treatment centre in Saskatchewan, Canada.
resultsData collection included administering cognitive screening tools to older people in custody (n = 28) and a formal diagnostic assessment for dementia by a geriatrician (n = 18). Findings revealed that (a) cognitive screening tools varied in the identification of possible dementia, with point estimates ranging from 21% (Canadian Indigenous Cognitive Assessment; CICA) to 43% (Community Screening Instrument for Dementia; CSI 'D'), whereas 33% of participants were screened positive for cognitive impairment (Mini-Mental State Exam; MMSE); (b) approximately 39% were diagnosed with dementia and 17% with mild cognitive impairment; and, (c) certain screening tools (CICA and MMSE) perform better in classifying cases of dementia.
conclusionsPreliminary evidence suggests variability in the diagnostic performance of the assessed cognitive screening tools. The CICA and MMSE show promise in discriminating older males in custody in a forensic psychiatric setting with dementia from those without.
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.