Cargando…

A comparative study on the validations of three cognitive screening tests in identifying subtle cognitive decline

BACKGROUND: Subtle cognitive decline (SCD) may represent a very early stage of objective cognitive impairment before mild cognitive impairment (MCI), with less neuronal damage and more functional reservation. Detecting individuals with SCD is imperative for dementia prevention and treatment. In this...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Pan, Feng-Feng, Huang, Lin, Chen, Ke-liang, Zhao, Qian-hua, Guo, Qi-hao
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7057545/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32138678
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12883-020-01657-9
_version_ 1783503683586097152
author Pan, Feng-Feng
Huang, Lin
Chen, Ke-liang
Zhao, Qian-hua
Guo, Qi-hao
author_facet Pan, Feng-Feng
Huang, Lin
Chen, Ke-liang
Zhao, Qian-hua
Guo, Qi-hao
author_sort Pan, Feng-Feng
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Subtle cognitive decline (SCD) may represent a very early stage of objective cognitive impairment before mild cognitive impairment (MCI), with less neuronal damage and more functional reservation. Detecting individuals with SCD is imperative for dementia prevention and treatment. In this study, we aimed to compare the validations of three cognitive screening tests, Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE), Montreal Cognitive Assessment-Chinese Version (MoCA-CV), and Memory and Executive Screening (MES), in identifying subtle cognitive decline. METHODS: A total of 407 individuals were recruited, including 147 cognitively normal controls (NC), 102 individuals with subtle cognitive decline (SCD) and 158 individuals with mild cognitive impairment (MCI) according to the operational neuropsychological criteria proposed by Jak and Bondi’s. All participants underwent standardized comprehensive neuropsychological tests and the three cognitive screening tests. Chi-square analysis was used to compare the cognitive performance among the groups of NC, SCD and MCI. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were used to evaluate the abilities of MMSE, MoCA-CV and MES in discriminating NC, SCD and MCI. RESULTS: Compared with NC, SCD showed a significant decline only in the tests of memory, such as Auditory Verbal Learning Test (AVLT), Rey-Osterrieth Complex Figure Test (CFT) and Prospective Memory Test (PrM) (P < 0.01). However, MCI showed significant decline in all cognitive performances (P < 0.01). The scores of MMSE, MoCA-CV and MES all showed a progressive downward trend within the groups of NC, SCD and MCI (P < 0.001). In ROC Analyses for discriminating individuals with SCD from NC, the most appropriate MES cutoff was 84, with a sensitivity of 74.3%, a specificity of 60.8% and 0.738 for AUC (95%CI, 0.675–0.801). By contrast, MMSE and MOCA-CV had poor sensitivity (67.4 and 70.8%, respectively) and specificity (51.0 and 52.9%, respectively), and smaller AUCs (0.643 and 0.644, respectively) than the MES. CONCLUSION: As a screening test, MES is more efficacious in identifying SCD from normal controls than MMSE and MoCA-CV.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7057545
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-70575452020-03-10 A comparative study on the validations of three cognitive screening tests in identifying subtle cognitive decline Pan, Feng-Feng Huang, Lin Chen, Ke-liang Zhao, Qian-hua Guo, Qi-hao BMC Neurol Research Article BACKGROUND: Subtle cognitive decline (SCD) may represent a very early stage of objective cognitive impairment before mild cognitive impairment (MCI), with less neuronal damage and more functional reservation. Detecting individuals with SCD is imperative for dementia prevention and treatment. In this study, we aimed to compare the validations of three cognitive screening tests, Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE), Montreal Cognitive Assessment-Chinese Version (MoCA-CV), and Memory and Executive Screening (MES), in identifying subtle cognitive decline. METHODS: A total of 407 individuals were recruited, including 147 cognitively normal controls (NC), 102 individuals with subtle cognitive decline (SCD) and 158 individuals with mild cognitive impairment (MCI) according to the operational neuropsychological criteria proposed by Jak and Bondi’s. All participants underwent standardized comprehensive neuropsychological tests and the three cognitive screening tests. Chi-square analysis was used to compare the cognitive performance among the groups of NC, SCD and MCI. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were used to evaluate the abilities of MMSE, MoCA-CV and MES in discriminating NC, SCD and MCI. RESULTS: Compared with NC, SCD showed a significant decline only in the tests of memory, such as Auditory Verbal Learning Test (AVLT), Rey-Osterrieth Complex Figure Test (CFT) and Prospective Memory Test (PrM) (P < 0.01). However, MCI showed significant decline in all cognitive performances (P < 0.01). The scores of MMSE, MoCA-CV and MES all showed a progressive downward trend within the groups of NC, SCD and MCI (P < 0.001). In ROC Analyses for discriminating individuals with SCD from NC, the most appropriate MES cutoff was 84, with a sensitivity of 74.3%, a specificity of 60.8% and 0.738 for AUC (95%CI, 0.675–0.801). By contrast, MMSE and MOCA-CV had poor sensitivity (67.4 and 70.8%, respectively) and specificity (51.0 and 52.9%, respectively), and smaller AUCs (0.643 and 0.644, respectively) than the MES. CONCLUSION: As a screening test, MES is more efficacious in identifying SCD from normal controls than MMSE and MoCA-CV. BioMed Central 2020-03-05 /pmc/articles/PMC7057545/ /pubmed/32138678 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12883-020-01657-9 Text en © The Author(s) 2020 Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
spellingShingle Research Article
Pan, Feng-Feng
Huang, Lin
Chen, Ke-liang
Zhao, Qian-hua
Guo, Qi-hao
A comparative study on the validations of three cognitive screening tests in identifying subtle cognitive decline
title A comparative study on the validations of three cognitive screening tests in identifying subtle cognitive decline
title_full A comparative study on the validations of three cognitive screening tests in identifying subtle cognitive decline
title_fullStr A comparative study on the validations of three cognitive screening tests in identifying subtle cognitive decline
title_full_unstemmed A comparative study on the validations of three cognitive screening tests in identifying subtle cognitive decline
title_short A comparative study on the validations of three cognitive screening tests in identifying subtle cognitive decline
title_sort comparative study on the validations of three cognitive screening tests in identifying subtle cognitive decline
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7057545/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32138678
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12883-020-01657-9
work_keys_str_mv AT panfengfeng acomparativestudyonthevalidationsofthreecognitivescreeningtestsinidentifyingsubtlecognitivedecline
AT huanglin acomparativestudyonthevalidationsofthreecognitivescreeningtestsinidentifyingsubtlecognitivedecline
AT chenkeliang acomparativestudyonthevalidationsofthreecognitivescreeningtestsinidentifyingsubtlecognitivedecline
AT zhaoqianhua acomparativestudyonthevalidationsofthreecognitivescreeningtestsinidentifyingsubtlecognitivedecline
AT guoqihao acomparativestudyonthevalidationsofthreecognitivescreeningtestsinidentifyingsubtlecognitivedecline
AT panfengfeng comparativestudyonthevalidationsofthreecognitivescreeningtestsinidentifyingsubtlecognitivedecline
AT huanglin comparativestudyonthevalidationsofthreecognitivescreeningtestsinidentifyingsubtlecognitivedecline
AT chenkeliang comparativestudyonthevalidationsofthreecognitivescreeningtestsinidentifyingsubtlecognitivedecline
AT zhaoqianhua comparativestudyonthevalidationsofthreecognitivescreeningtestsinidentifyingsubtlecognitivedecline
AT guoqihao comparativestudyonthevalidationsofthreecognitivescreeningtestsinidentifyingsubtlecognitivedecline