Get help now — free helplines

You can call any of these for free. You do not need a diagnosis, an appointment, or a crisis to call — questions and plain exhaustion are reasons enough.

  • Alzheimer's Association 24/7 Helpline 800-272-3900 24 hours a day, 365 days a year Free, confidential support and information for people with dementia, caregivers, families and the public. Master's-level clinicians. Also Spanish.
  • 988 Suicide & Crisis Lifeline 988 24/7 Call or text 988, or chat at 988lifeline.org. For anyone in emotional distress or a mental-health crisis, including caregivers.
  • Alzheimer's Foundation of America (AFA) Helpline 866-232-8484 9:00 am - 9:00 pm ET, seven days a week Licensed social workers providing support, info and referrals. Also text message and web chat. Text: 646-586-5283

In a medical emergency, call 911. More numbers, and what each line does, on the help page.

This page is alzhub.org's plain-English summary of a published study, not the paper itself. It is generated from the record we hold for this study, sourced and linked below — check the original for the full text and methods.

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 43 out of 100. Mild cognitive impairment

Topic: Amyloid, tau and blood-test diagnosis

Objective To carry out meaningful comparisons on results of different research studies on mild cognitive impairment (MCI), it is critical to select an appropriate objective memory test to examine memory deficit. We aim to refine the operational criteria of amnestic MCI (aMCI) on neuropsychological tests that optimally balance the sensitivity and specificity. Methods We focused on 206 non-demented subjects from memory clinic. We then classified each individual as having MCI or subjective cognitive decline (SCD) according to different neuropsychological criteria. By following them longitudinally, clinical outcomes were compared to evaluate the stability of MCI diagnoses and prediction of progression. Results The delayed recall of auditory verbal learning test (AVLT_DR) identified 116 subjects as MCI, resulted in the conversion rate as 44% over the roughly 30-month time interval, missed 7.8% incipient Alzheimer's disease (AD) patients in SCD group who eventually converted to dementia. The delayed recall of complex figure test (CFT_DR) identified fewer MCI patients (n=95) and misdiagnosed more preclinical AD patients (15.3%), in comparison with AVLT criterion. Criterion requiring deficits in both tests produced higher conversion rate (54.3%), but resulted in higher misdiagnosis rate (14.7%) simultaneously. The AVLT criterion had the largest area under the curve (0.7248, p Conclusion AVLT is superior to CFT in the stability of diagnoses and prediction of progression. In the clinical setting, the "one test" criterion AVLT has similar sensitivity to both-deficits methods, and is optimal in balancing sensitivity and specificity.

Key findings

Why it matters

In 206 non-demented people from a memory clinic, using delayed recall of the auditory verbal learning test to define mild cognitive impairment gave a 44% conversion rate over about 30 months and missed fewer incipient Alzheimer's cases than a figure memory test. The study is about which memory test best predicts progression, not about treating or preventing the disease.

Study details

How this study scored 43/100
How this study's score is builtJournal tier 7 of 10; Journal's citation record 1 of 4; Study design 0 of 12; Strength of evidence 1 of 5; Peer-review validation 10 of 10; How recent 1 of 5; Sample size 1 of 4; Effect reported 2 of 3; Studied in people 3 of 3; Randomised / blinded 0 of 2; Times cited 5 of 7; Citations per year 3 of 5; Impact for its field and year 2 of 6; Cited by studies here 0 of 6; Still being cited 2 of 4; Senior author's track record 2 of 4; Institution's track record left out, no data; Multi-centre collaboration 0 of 3; Indexed in PubMed 2 of 2; Free to read 0 of 2. 42 of the 97 points it could be judged on, which is 43 of 100. Total 43 of 100.42 of the 97 points we could judge = 43 of 100

Published in a peer-reviewed journal. Scored zero for study design and randomised / blinded because the record does not state it. We have no data on institution's track record, so that was left out: it earned 42 of the 97 points we could judge it on, which is 43 out of 100.

ComponentPointsWhy
Journal tier 7 / 10 Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Current Alzheimer research)
Journal's citation record 1 / 4 Current Alzheimer Research: journal h-index 119 (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 2015 — within 20 year(s) of the newest study here
Sample size 1 / 4 95 participants
Effect reported 2 / 3 Effect reported as a number, without an interval or test
Studied in people 3 / 3 Studied in people (participant count stated)
Randomised / blinded 0 / 2 No randomisation or blinding stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Times cited 5 / 7 Cited 132 times (OpenAlex, 2026-10-10)
Citations per year 3 / 5 10.2 citations a year over 13 year(s) since 2015
Impact for its field and year 2 / 6 Cited 2.2× the average for papers of its field and year (OpenAlex FWCI)
Cited by studies here 0 / 6 No other study in this library cites it
Still being cited 2 / 4 Cited 48 times in 2024–2026 (2026 still in progress; OpenAlex)
Senior author's track record 2 / 4 Last-listed author Zhen Hong: h-index 38 (OpenAlex, whole career)
Institution's track record — / 3 No institution listed in OpenAlex — left out of this score
Multi-centre collaboration 0 / 3 OpenAlex lists 0 institution(s) in 0 countries — scores zero (affiliation lists can be incomplete)
Indexed in PubMed 2 / 2 Indexed in PubMed (PMID 26027810)
Free to read 0 / 2 Behind a paywall — scores zero
Points 42 / 97 Scored on 19 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 42 of the 97 points we could judge it on is 43 out of 100.
Total 43 / 100 —

What each of these 20 components measures, and what this score is not →

Read the original

May need a subscription OpenAlex found no free copy of the full text (checked 6 Feb 1020), so the publisher may charge for it. The PubMed abstract is free.

Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris

Built from the record alzhub holds for this paper, not looked up. Volume, issue and page numbers are not held in the record. The record names 7 authors; APA and Vancouver show the first six, BibTeX and the downloads carry all of them. Check the citation against the original before you use it.

APA 7th

Zhao, Q., Guo, Q., Liang, X., Chen, M., Zhou, Y., Ding, D., et al. (2015). Auditory Verbal Learning Test is Superior to Rey-Osterrieth Complex Figure Memory for Predicting Mild Cognitive Impairment to Alzheimer's Disease. Current Alzheimer research. https://doi.org/10.2174/1567205012666150530202729

Vancouver

Zhao Q, Guo Q, Liang X, Chen M, Zhou Y, Ding D, et al. Auditory Verbal Learning Test is Superior to Rey-Osterrieth Complex Figure Memory for Predicting Mild Cognitive Impairment to Alzheimer's Disease. Current Alzheimer research. 2015. doi:10.2174/1567205012666150530202729. PMID: 26027810.

BibTeX

@article{zhao2015-26027810,
  author  = {Zhao, Q. and Guo, Q. and Liang, X. and Chen, M. and Zhou, Y. and Ding, D. and Hong, Z.},
  title   = {{Auditory Verbal Learning Test is Superior to Rey-Osterrieth Complex Figure Memory for Predicting Mild Cognitive Impairment to Alzheimer's Disease}},
  journal = {Current Alzheimer research},
  year    = {2015},
  doi     = {10.2174/1567205012666150530202729},
  pmid    = {26027810},
  url     = {https://doi.org/10.2174/1567205012666150530202729}
}

Related studies in Mild cognitive impairment

Also tagged “assessment”

840 studies in the library carry the topic tag “assessment”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 840 tagged studies.

Similar studies

More on Mild cognitive impairment

See all studies in Mild cognitive impairment →