TY - JOUR
T1 - Accuracy of the short‐form Montreal Cognitive Assessment: systematic review and validation
AU - McDicken, Jennifer A.
AU - Elliot, Emma
AU - Blayney , Gareth
AU - Makin, Stephen
AU - Ali, Myzoon
AU - Larner, Andrew J.
AU - Quinn, Terence J.
AU - VISTA‐Cognition Collaborators
N1 - Acceptance from webpage
AAM req'd 14/11/19 DC
^Author notes this is not linked to GCU but part of Glasgow Uni work. Requested AAM again. ET 21/11/19
Not available in other repository at 11/5/20, changed to 'no exception' with file not received after 2 requests. ET
PY - 2019/10
Y1 - 2019/10
N2 - IntroductionShort‐form versions of the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (SF‐MoCA) are increasingly used to screen for dementia in research and practice. We sought to collate evidence on the accuracy of SF‐MoCAs and to externally validate these assessment tools.MethodsWe performed systematic literature searching across multidisciplinary electronic literature databases, collating information on the content and accuracy of all published SF‐MoCAs. We then validated all the SF‐MoCAs against clinical diagnosis using independent stroke (n = 787) and memory clinic (n = 410) data sets.ResultsWe identified 13 different SF‐MoCAs (21 studies, n = 6477 participants) with differing test content and properties. There was a pattern of high sensitivity across the range of SF‐MoCA tests. In the published literature, for detection of post stroke cognitive impairment, median sensitivity across included studies: 0.88 (range: 0.70‐1.00); specificity: 0.70 (0.39‐0.92). In our independent validation using stroke data, median sensitivity: 0.99 (0.80‐1.00); specificity: 0.40 (0.14‐0.87). To detect dementia in older adults, median sensitivity: 0.88 (0.62‐0.98); median specificity: 0.87 (0.07‐0.98) in the literature and median sensitivity: 0.96 (range: 0.72‐1.00); median specificity: 0.36 (0.14‐0.86) in our validation. Horton's SF‐MoCA (delayed recall, serial subtraction, and orientation) had the most favorable properties in stroke (sensitivity: 0.90, specificity: 0.87, positive predictive value [PPV]: 0.55, and negative predictive value [NPV]: 0.93), whereas Cecato's “MoCA reduced” (clock draw, animal naming, delayed recall, and orientation) performed better in the memory clinic (sensitivity: 0.72, specificity: 0.86, PPV: 0.55, and NPV: 0.93).ConclusionsThere are many published SF‐MoCAs. Clinicians and researchers using a SF‐MoCA should be explicit about the content. For all SF‐MoCA, sensitivity is high and similar to the full scale suggesting potential utility as an initial cognitive screening tool. However, choice of SF‐MoCA should be informed by the clinical population to be studied.
AB - IntroductionShort‐form versions of the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (SF‐MoCA) are increasingly used to screen for dementia in research and practice. We sought to collate evidence on the accuracy of SF‐MoCAs and to externally validate these assessment tools.MethodsWe performed systematic literature searching across multidisciplinary electronic literature databases, collating information on the content and accuracy of all published SF‐MoCAs. We then validated all the SF‐MoCAs against clinical diagnosis using independent stroke (n = 787) and memory clinic (n = 410) data sets.ResultsWe identified 13 different SF‐MoCAs (21 studies, n = 6477 participants) with differing test content and properties. There was a pattern of high sensitivity across the range of SF‐MoCA tests. In the published literature, for detection of post stroke cognitive impairment, median sensitivity across included studies: 0.88 (range: 0.70‐1.00); specificity: 0.70 (0.39‐0.92). In our independent validation using stroke data, median sensitivity: 0.99 (0.80‐1.00); specificity: 0.40 (0.14‐0.87). To detect dementia in older adults, median sensitivity: 0.88 (0.62‐0.98); median specificity: 0.87 (0.07‐0.98) in the literature and median sensitivity: 0.96 (range: 0.72‐1.00); median specificity: 0.36 (0.14‐0.86) in our validation. Horton's SF‐MoCA (delayed recall, serial subtraction, and orientation) had the most favorable properties in stroke (sensitivity: 0.90, specificity: 0.87, positive predictive value [PPV]: 0.55, and negative predictive value [NPV]: 0.93), whereas Cecato's “MoCA reduced” (clock draw, animal naming, delayed recall, and orientation) performed better in the memory clinic (sensitivity: 0.72, specificity: 0.86, PPV: 0.55, and NPV: 0.93).ConclusionsThere are many published SF‐MoCAs. Clinicians and researchers using a SF‐MoCA should be explicit about the content. For all SF‐MoCA, sensitivity is high and similar to the full scale suggesting potential utility as an initial cognitive screening tool. However, choice of SF‐MoCA should be informed by the clinical population to be studied.
KW - cognitive impairment
KW - dementia
KW - Montreal Cognitive Assessment
KW - sensitivity
KW - specificity
U2 - 10.1002/gps.5162
DO - 10.1002/gps.5162
M3 - Article
SN - 0885-6230
VL - 34
SP - 1515
EP - 1525
JO - International Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry
JF - International Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry
IS - 10
ER -