ReviewNeuropsychology review2026
Use and Psychometric Properties of the MoCA in Spain: a Systematic Review With Meta-Analysis and Meta-Regression.
Review in Neuropsychology review, 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
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
While the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) is a reference instrument for cognitive screening, sociodemographic factors such as age and education can affect its diagnostic accuracy. The aims of this systematic review were to characterize the use of the MoCA in samples from Spain and to analyze its psychometric properties. A systematic search was conducted in the main scientific databases up to February 2025. The evidence was synthesized using a dual strategy: a quantitative synthesis (meta-analysis and meta-regression) for the first aim, and a narrative synthesis of psychometric properties guided by the COSMIN framework for the second. Eighty studies were included: 78 (n = 7,457) in the meta-analysis. The mean MoCA score was 22.85, with substantial heterogeneity (I² = 99.3%). Meta-regression explained 62% of this variability, identifying age (β = -0.19/year) and education (β = 1.28/year) as the most significant predictors. Scores were lower in dementia and mild cognitive impairment compared with healthy participants. The narrative synthesis of psychometric properties showed that the MoCA has adequate psychometric properties in the studies conducted in Spain, with good internal consistency (Cronbach's α: 0.76-0.90) and criterion-related validity (area under the curve: 0.78-0.96). The robustness of the findings was confirmed by sensitivity analyses. In conclusion, the MoCA is a valid and widely used tool in Spain, but its performance is strongly modulated by age and education, supporting the use of adjusted normative data rather than a single universal cut-off.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42380691What 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.