Home › Research › Getting a diagnosis
A review of screening tests for cognitive impairment
Cullen B, O'Neill B, Evans JJ, Coen RF, Lawlor BA.. Journal of neurology, neurosurgery, and psychiatry, 2006-12-18
Topic: Risk, prevention and care in population studies
The merit of screening for dementia and cognitive impairment has been the subject of recent debate. One of the main limitations in this regard is the lack of robust evidence to support the many screening tests available. Although plentiful in number, few such instruments have been well validated in the populations for which they are intended to be used. In addition, it is likely that "one size does not fit all" in cognitive screening, leading to the development of many specialised tests for particular types of impairment. In this review, we sought to ascertain the number of screening tools currently available, and to examine the evidence for their validity in detecting different diagnoses in a variety of populations. A further consideration was whether each screen elicited indices of a range of cognitive, affective and functional domains or abilities, as such information is a valuable adjunct to simple cut-off scores. Thirty-nine screens were identified and discussed with reference to three purposes: brief assessment in the doctor's office; large scale community screening programmes; and identifying profiles of impairment across different cognitive, psychiatric and functional domains/abilities, to guide differential diagnosis and further assessment. A small number of screens rated highly for both validity and content. This review is intended to serve as an evaluative resource, to guide clinicians and researchers in choosing among the wide range of screens which are currently available.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Cullen, B., O'Neill, B., Evans, J. J., Coen, R. F., & Lawlor, B. A. (2007). A review of screening tests for cognitive impairment. Journal of neurology, neurosurgery, and psychiatry. https://doi.org/10.1136/jnnp.2006.095414
Vancouver
Cullen B, O'Neill B, Evans JJ, Coen RF, Lawlor BA. A review of screening tests for cognitive impairment. Journal of neurology, neurosurgery, and psychiatry. 2007. doi:10.1136/jnnp.2006.095414. PMID: 17178826.
BibTeX
@article{cullen2007-17178826,
author = {Cullen, B. and O'Neill, B. and Evans, J. J. and Coen, R. F. and Lawlor, B. A.},
title = {{A review of screening tests for cognitive impairment}},
journal = {Journal of neurology, neurosurgery, and psychiatry},
year = {2007},
doi = {10.1136/jnnp.2006.095414},
pmid = {17178826},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1136/jnnp.2006.095414}
}
Built from the record alzhub holds for this paper, not looked up. Volume, issue and page numbers are not held in the record. Check the citation against the original before you use it.
Key findings
- In this review, we sought to ascertain the number of screening tools currently available, and to examine the evidence for their validity in detecting different diagnoses in a variety of populations.
- A further consideration was whether each screen elicited indices of a range of cognitive, affective and functional domains or abilities, as such information is a valuable adjunct to simple cut-off scores.
- Thirty-nine screens were identified and discussed with reference to three purposes: brief assessment in the doctor's office; large scale community screening programmes; and identifying profiles of impairment across different cognitive, psychiatric and functional domains/abilities, to guide differential diagnosis and further assessment.
- A small number of screens rated highly for both validity and content.
- This review is intended to serve as an evaluative resource, to guide clinicians and researchers in choosing among the wide range of screens which are currently available.
Why it matters
This review identified 39 screening tests for cognitive impairment and examined the evidence for their validity in different populations. It concerns screening and diagnosis, not treating, curing, or preventing dementia.
New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Getting a diagnosis →
Study details
- Evidence strengthLow
How this study scored 47/100
Published in a peer-reviewed journal. Scored zero for study design, sample size, effect reported, studied in people and randomised / blinded because the record does not state it.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 7 / 10 | Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Journal of neurology, neurosurgery, and psychiatry) |
| Journal's citation record | 3 / 4 | Journal of Neurology Neurosurgery & Psychiatry: journal h-index 336 (OpenAlex, 2026-10-29) |
| Study design | 0 / 12 | No study design recorded — scores zero, not guessed (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Strength of evidence | 1 / 5 | Rated “low” in our summary |
| Peer-review validation | 10 / 10 | Peer-reviewed. Published as an article in a named peer-reviewed journal. |
| How recent | 1 / 5 | 2007 — within 20 year(s) of the newest study here |
| Sample size | 0 / 4 | Participant count not stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Effect reported | 0 / 3 | No effect size reported — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Studied in people | 0 / 3 | Not stated whether this was studied in people — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Randomised / blinded | 0 / 2 | No randomisation or blinding stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Times cited | 6 / 7 | Cited 570 times (OpenAlex, 2026-10-10) |
| Citations per year | 4 / 5 | 27.1 citations a year over 21 year(s) since 2007 |
| Impact for its field and year | 3 / 6 | Cited 4.6× the average for papers of its field and year (OpenAlex FWCI) |
| Cited by studies here | 3 / 6 | Cited by 12 other studies in this library |
| Still being cited | 3 / 4 | Cited 81 times in 2024–2026 (2026 still in progress; OpenAlex) |
| Senior author's track record | 1 / 4 | Last-listed author Brian A. Lawlor: h-index 12 (OpenAlex, whole career) |
| Institution's track record | 2 / 3 | University of Glasgow: institution h-index 1,600 (OpenAlex) |
| Multi-centre collaboration | 1 / 3 | OpenAlex lists 3 institution(s) in 2 countries |
| Indexed in PubMed | 2 / 2 | Indexed in PubMed (PMID 17178826) |
| Free to read | 0 / 2 | Behind a paywall — scores zero |
| Total | 47 / 100 | — |
What each of these 20 components measures, and what this score is not →
Read the original
- DOI: 10.1136/jnnp.2006.095414
- PubMed: 17178826
- Original source →
- Free full text: Journal of Neurology Neurosurgery & Psychiatry →
Full text: free to read — OpenAlex lists this copy as free to read: the link above (checked 6 Feb 1020).
Related
Studies in the library that share something with this one. The line above each title says what.
Studies this one cites
Referenced by this study and also in the alzhub library, so you can read them here. Showing 12 of 23.
Later studies that cite this one
12 studies in the alzhub library list this one in their references. Showing the 8 highest-scoring.
Related studies in Getting a diagnosis
Also tagged “mini-mental”
840 studies in the library carry the topic tag “mini-mental”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 840 tagged studies.