ArticleJournal of forensic sciences2026
Forensic psychiatric evaluation of legal capacity in older adults: Clinical and cognitive correlates.
Article in Journal of forensic sciences, 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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Forensic psychiatric evaluation of capacity is commonly requested in clinical practice, particularly in relation to financial decision-making and power of attorney. However, empirical data describing real-world assessment processes and associated clinical factors remain limited. This study examined patients referred for forensic psychiatric evaluation of capacity in a specialized outpatient setting and explored the relationship between routinely administered cognitive screening measures and clinical determinations. A retrospective analysis was conducted on 1247 individuals aged 60-98 years who underwent evaluation between 2020 and 2026. Sociodemographic characteristics, clinical assessments, and results of cognitive screening tools-including the Standardized Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE), Verbal Fluency Test, and Clock Drawing Test-were analyzed in relation to clinical capacity determinations. Most individuals (90.9%) were assessed as possessing capacity, while 9.1% were considered to lack capacity and were recommended for guardianship. Individuals lacking capacity were older, had fewer years of education, and demonstrated lower performance across all cognitive measures. In multivariable analyses, MMSE and verbal fluency scores were associated with clinical determinations of capacity, whereas demographic variables were not independently associated. ROC analyses showed that MMSE had the highest discriminatory performance among individual measures. Cognitive screening results were interpreted as supportive information within a comprehensive forensic evaluation rather than as standalone determinants of legal capacity. These findings reflect routine clinical practice and highlight the importance of integrating cognitive, clinical, and contextual factors in forensic capacity assessments.
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.