Cargando…

A systematic review and meta-analysis of studies on screening for mild cognitive impairment in primary healthcare

BACKGROUND: Cognitive disorders and dementia have an important effect on individual independence and orientation. According to the Alzheimer's Disease International (ADI) 75% of people with dementia are not diagnosed; this may be as high as 90% in some low- and middle-income countries. This sys...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Karimi, Leila, Mahboub–Ahari, Alireza, Jahangiry, Leila, Sadeghi-Bazargani, Homayoun, Farahbakhsh, Mostafa
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8827177/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35139803
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12888-022-03730-8
_version_ 1784647573703753728
author Karimi, Leila
Mahboub–Ahari, Alireza
Jahangiry, Leila
Sadeghi-Bazargani, Homayoun
Farahbakhsh, Mostafa
author_facet Karimi, Leila
Mahboub–Ahari, Alireza
Jahangiry, Leila
Sadeghi-Bazargani, Homayoun
Farahbakhsh, Mostafa
author_sort Karimi, Leila
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Cognitive disorders and dementia have an important effect on individual independence and orientation. According to the Alzheimer's Disease International (ADI) 75% of people with dementia are not diagnosed; this may be as high as 90% in some low- and middle-income countries. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to identify the test performance of screening tools and compare them pairwise. The findings of our study can support countries in planning to establish and care for mild cognitive impairment in primary health centers. METHODS: Medline (PubMed), Scopus, Cochrane, Dare, All EBM Reviews, CRD (OVID), and Proquest were searched from 2012 to November 2021. The risk of bias was assessed through the QUADAS-2 instrument. Given the high heterogeneity between studies, a random-effects model was used to calculate the pooled effect sizes for diagnostic accuracy measures (sensitivity, specificity, and area under curve indices). I(2) test was used for assessing heterogeneity and predefined subgroup analyses were performed using participants’ age, country’s income, and sample size of studies. RESULTS: A systematic search identified 18,132 records, of which, 20 studies were included in the quality assessment, and six were included in quantitative analysis. None of the studies had examined the feasibility or efficiency of mass screening. According to a pairwise comparison, IQCODE, AD8 and GPCOG showed equal or better diagnostic performance relative to the MMSE in terms of sensitivity and specificity. The random-effect model for the MMSE showed the pooled sensitivity equal to 0.73 (95% CI 0.57–0.90), the pooled specificity equal to 0.83 (95% CI 0.75—0.90), and the pooled AUC equal to 0.88 (95% CI 0.83–0.93). CONCLUSION: Several benefits have been attached to short tests making them a suitable choice for use in primary healthcare settings. Considering factors such as accuracy, time of application, ease of scoring, and utilization charges, tests such as IQCODE, AD8, and GPCOG or appropriate combination with counterpart tools seem to be good alternatives to the use of the MMSE in primary care.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8827177
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-88271772022-02-10 A systematic review and meta-analysis of studies on screening for mild cognitive impairment in primary healthcare Karimi, Leila Mahboub–Ahari, Alireza Jahangiry, Leila Sadeghi-Bazargani, Homayoun Farahbakhsh, Mostafa BMC Psychiatry Research BACKGROUND: Cognitive disorders and dementia have an important effect on individual independence and orientation. According to the Alzheimer's Disease International (ADI) 75% of people with dementia are not diagnosed; this may be as high as 90% in some low- and middle-income countries. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to identify the test performance of screening tools and compare them pairwise. The findings of our study can support countries in planning to establish and care for mild cognitive impairment in primary health centers. METHODS: Medline (PubMed), Scopus, Cochrane, Dare, All EBM Reviews, CRD (OVID), and Proquest were searched from 2012 to November 2021. The risk of bias was assessed through the QUADAS-2 instrument. Given the high heterogeneity between studies, a random-effects model was used to calculate the pooled effect sizes for diagnostic accuracy measures (sensitivity, specificity, and area under curve indices). I(2) test was used for assessing heterogeneity and predefined subgroup analyses were performed using participants’ age, country’s income, and sample size of studies. RESULTS: A systematic search identified 18,132 records, of which, 20 studies were included in the quality assessment, and six were included in quantitative analysis. None of the studies had examined the feasibility or efficiency of mass screening. According to a pairwise comparison, IQCODE, AD8 and GPCOG showed equal or better diagnostic performance relative to the MMSE in terms of sensitivity and specificity. The random-effect model for the MMSE showed the pooled sensitivity equal to 0.73 (95% CI 0.57–0.90), the pooled specificity equal to 0.83 (95% CI 0.75—0.90), and the pooled AUC equal to 0.88 (95% CI 0.83–0.93). CONCLUSION: Several benefits have been attached to short tests making them a suitable choice for use in primary healthcare settings. Considering factors such as accuracy, time of application, ease of scoring, and utilization charges, tests such as IQCODE, AD8, and GPCOG or appropriate combination with counterpart tools seem to be good alternatives to the use of the MMSE in primary care. BioMed Central 2022-02-09 /pmc/articles/PMC8827177/ /pubmed/35139803 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12888-022-03730-8 Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/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/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://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
Karimi, Leila
Mahboub–Ahari, Alireza
Jahangiry, Leila
Sadeghi-Bazargani, Homayoun
Farahbakhsh, Mostafa
A systematic review and meta-analysis of studies on screening for mild cognitive impairment in primary healthcare
title A systematic review and meta-analysis of studies on screening for mild cognitive impairment in primary healthcare
title_full A systematic review and meta-analysis of studies on screening for mild cognitive impairment in primary healthcare
title_fullStr A systematic review and meta-analysis of studies on screening for mild cognitive impairment in primary healthcare
title_full_unstemmed A systematic review and meta-analysis of studies on screening for mild cognitive impairment in primary healthcare
title_short A systematic review and meta-analysis of studies on screening for mild cognitive impairment in primary healthcare
title_sort systematic review and meta-analysis of studies on screening for mild cognitive impairment in primary healthcare
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8827177/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35139803
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12888-022-03730-8
work_keys_str_mv AT karimileila asystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofstudiesonscreeningformildcognitiveimpairmentinprimaryhealthcare
AT mahboubaharialireza asystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofstudiesonscreeningformildcognitiveimpairmentinprimaryhealthcare
AT jahangiryleila asystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofstudiesonscreeningformildcognitiveimpairmentinprimaryhealthcare
AT sadeghibazarganihomayoun asystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofstudiesonscreeningformildcognitiveimpairmentinprimaryhealthcare
AT farahbakhshmostafa asystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofstudiesonscreeningformildcognitiveimpairmentinprimaryhealthcare
AT karimileila systematicreviewandmetaanalysisofstudiesonscreeningformildcognitiveimpairmentinprimaryhealthcare
AT mahboubaharialireza systematicreviewandmetaanalysisofstudiesonscreeningformildcognitiveimpairmentinprimaryhealthcare
AT jahangiryleila systematicreviewandmetaanalysisofstudiesonscreeningformildcognitiveimpairmentinprimaryhealthcare
AT sadeghibazarganihomayoun systematicreviewandmetaanalysisofstudiesonscreeningformildcognitiveimpairmentinprimaryhealthcare
AT farahbakhshmostafa systematicreviewandmetaanalysisofstudiesonscreeningformildcognitiveimpairmentinprimaryhealthcare