Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42967498›Full record

ReviewAlzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association2026

Measuring mild cognitive impairment using routinely collected health-care data: A conceptual framework and guidance for embedded pragmatic clinical trials.

Dae Hyun Kim, Kevin W McConeghy, Jennifer L Lund, Ryan Mace, David H Lynch, Elizabeth M White, Hua Xu, Rafael Samper-Ternent, Phillip Wang, Ellen P McCarthy and 1 more

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors.

Dae Hyun KimThe Hinda and Arthur Marcus Institute for Aging Research, Hebrew SeniorLife, Division of Gerontology, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7290-6838
Kevin W McConeghyDepartment of Health Services, Policy, and Practice, Brown University School of Public Health, Providence, Rhode Island, USA.
Jennifer L LundDepartment of Epidemiology, Gillings School of Global Public Health, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, USA.
Ryan MaceCenter for Health Outcomes and Interdisciplinary Research, Department of Psychiatry, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
David H LynchDivision of Geriatric Medicine, University of North Carolina School of Medicine, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, USA.
Elizabeth M WhiteDepartment of Health Services, Policy, and Practice, Brown University School of Public Health, Providence, Rhode Island, USA.
Hua XuDepartment of Biomedical Informatics and Data Science, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut, USA.
Rafael Samper-TernentDepartment of Management, Policy, and Community Health, School of Public Health, Institute on Aging, The University of Texas Health Science Center in Houston, Houston, Texas, USA.
Phillip WangDepartment of Epidemiology, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Division of Pharmacoepidemiology and Pharmacoeconomics, Department of Medicine and Department of Psychiatry, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Ellen P McCarthyThe Hinda and Arthur Marcus Institute for Aging Research, Hebrew SeniorLife, Division of Gerontology, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
NIA IMPACT Collaboratory Technical Data-Health Care Systems Core

Funding

Training Core (I)U54AG063546 · NIA · BROWN UNIVERSITY · PI LAURA C HANSON · 2019 to 2026
$125.9M
National Institute on Aging (NIA)National Institutes of Health (NIH) U54AG063546NIA IMPACTNIA NIH HHS U54 AG063546
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Mild cognitive impairment (MCI) is increasingly measured using routinely collected health-care data in embedded pragmatic clinical trials. However, accurate ascertainment remains challenging because key diagnostic elements, such as cognitive function and functional status, are often incompletely captured. We identified three broad categories for measuring MCI using routinely collected health-care data: documentation-based approaches, which identify clinician-recognized MCI; clinical criteria-based approaches, which reconstruct the diagnostic construct using available clinical information; and prediction-based approaches, which estimate the likelihood of MCI using statistical or machine learning models. These approaches measure distinct constructs and differ in validity and scalability, and susceptibility to bias. For eligibility and outcome ascertainment, clinical criteria-based approaches should be prioritized whenever feasible. Documentation-based approaches may serve as complementary measures of clinician-recognized MCI, whereas prediction-based approaches are best suited for screening and risk stratification. Continued advances in phenotype development, data standardization, and validation are needed to support accurate and equitable MCI ascertainment.

Indexed as

Cognitive DysfunctionElectronic Health RecordsPragmatic Clinical Trials as TopicHumansadministrative dataelectronic health recordsinformaticsmild cognitive impairmentpragmatic clinical trials

Identifiers

PMID42967498
PMCPMC13724205

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.