26
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares

      Call for Papers: Sex and Gender in Neurodegenerative Diseases

      Submit here before September 30, 2024

      About Neurodegenerative Diseases: 1.9 Impact Factor I 5.9 CiteScore I 0.648 Scimago Journal & Country Rank (SJR)

      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found

      Comparative Diagnostic Accuracy of the ACE-III, MIS, MMSE, MoCA, and RUDAS for Screening of Alzheimer Disease

      research-article

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPubMed
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background: Our aim was to evaluate and compare the diagnostic properties of 5 screening tests for the diagnosis of mild Alzheimer disease (AD). Methods: We conducted a prospective and cross-sectional study of 92 patients with mild AD and of 68 healthy controls from our Department of Neurology. The diagnostic properties of the following tests were compared: Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE), Addenbrooke's Cognitive Examination III (ACE-III), Memory Impairment Screen (MIS), Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA), and Rowland Universal Dementia Assessment Scale (RUDAS). Results: All tests yielded high diagnostic accuracy, with the ACE-III achieving the best diagnostic properties. The area under the curve was 0.897 for the ACE-III, 0.889 for the RUDAS, 0.874 for the MMSE, 0.866 for the MIS, and 0.856 for the MoCA. The Mini-ACE score from the ACE-III showed the highest diagnostic capacity (area under the curve 0.939). Memory scores of the ACE-III and of the RUDAS showed a better diagnostic accuracy than those of the MMSE and of the MoCA. All tests, especially the ACE-III, conveyed a higher diagnostic accuracy in patients with full primary education than in the less educated group. Implementing normative data improved the diagnostic accuracy of the ACE-III but not that of the other tests. Conclusions: The ACE-III achieved the highest diagnostic accuracy. This better discrimination was more evident in the more educated group.

          Related collections

          Most cited references18

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          The Global Deterioration Scale for assessment of primary degenerative dementia

          (1982)
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: found

            Validation of the Addenbrooke's Cognitive Examination III in Frontotemporal Dementia and Alzheimer's Disease

            Background/Aims: The aims of this study were to validate the newly developed version of the Addenbrooke's Cognitive Examination (ACE-III) against standardised neuropsychological tests and its predecessor (ACE-R) in early dementia. Methods: A total of 61 patients with dementia (frontotemporal dementia, FTD, n = 33, and Alzheimer's disease, AD, n = 28) and 25 controls were included in the study. Results: ACE-III cognitive domains correlated significantly with standardised neuropsychological tests used in the assessment of attention, language, verbal memory and visuospatial function. The ACE-III also compared very favourably with its predecessor, the ACE-R, with similar levels of sensitivity and specificity. Conclusion: The results of this study provide objective validation of the ACE-III as a screening tool for cognitive deficits in FTD and AD.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found
              Is Open Access

              The Mini-Addenbrooke's Cognitive Examination: A New Assessment Tool for Dementia

              Background/Aims We developed and validated the Mini-Addenbrooke's Cognitive Examination (M-ACE) in dementia patients. Comparisons were also made with the Mini Mental State Examination (MMSE). Method The M-ACE was developed using Mokken scaling analysis in 117 dementia patients [behavioural variant frontotemporal dementia (bvFTD), n = 25; primary progressive aphasia (PPA), n = 49; Alzheimer's disease (AD), n = 34; corticobasal syndrome (CBS), n = 9] and validated in an independent sample of 164 dementia patients (bvFTD, n = 23; PPA, n = 82; AD, n = 38; CBS, n = 21) and 78 controls, who also completed the MMSE. Results The M-ACE consists of 5 items with a maximum score of 30. Two cut-offs were identified: (1) ≤25/30 has both high sensitivity and specificity, and (2) ≤21/30 is almost certainly a score to have come from a dementia patient regardless of the clinical setting. The M-ACE is more sensitive than the MMSE and is less likely to have ceiling effects. Conclusion The M-ACE is a brief and sensitive cognitive screening tool for dementia. Two cut-offs (25 or 21) are recommended.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                DEM
                Dement Geriatr Cogn Disord
                10.1159/issn.1420-8008
                Dementia and Geriatric Cognitive Disorders
                S. Karger AG
                1420-8008
                1421-9824
                2017
                June 2017
                07 April 2017
                : 43
                : 5-6
                : 237-246
                Affiliations
                Department of Neurology, San Carlos Institute for Health Research (IdISSC), Universidad Complutense, Madrid, Spain
                Author notes
                *Jordi A. Matías-Guiu, Department of Neurology, Hospital Clínico San Carlos, Prof. Martín Lagos St., ES-28040 Madrid (Spain), E-Mail jordimatiasguiu@hotmail.com or jordi.matias-guiu@salud.madrid.org
                Article
                469658 Dement Geriatr Cogn Disord 2017;43:237-246
                10.1159/000469658
                28384640
                56a120d5-eb32-4e45-871e-67976a9788f1
                © 2017 S. Karger AG, Basel

                Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher. Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug. Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.

                History
                : 07 March 2017
                Page count
                Tables: 5, References: 36, Pages: 10
                Categories
                Original Research Article

                Geriatric medicine,Neurology,Cardiovascular Medicine,Neurosciences,Clinical Psychology & Psychiatry,Public health
                Memory Impairment Screen,Mini-Mental State Examination,Addenbrooke’s Cognitive Examination,Alzheimer disease,Rowland Universal Dementia Assessment Scale,Screening,Neuropsychological assessment,Montreal Cognitive Assessment

                Comments

                Comment on this article

                scite_

                Similar content199

                Cited by36

                Most referenced authors891