Home › Research › Cognitive tests and assessment
Development of Cognitive Instruments for Use in Clinical Trials of Antidementia Drugs
Richard C. Mohs, David S. Knopman, Ronald Carl Petersen, Steven H. Ferris, Chris Ernesto, Michael Grundman, Mary Sano, Linas A. Bieliauskas, David Geldmacher, Chris M. Clark, Leon J. Thal. Alzheimer Disease & Associated Disorders, 1997
Topic: Risk, prevention and care in population studies
The cognitive assessment protocol of the Alzheimer's Disease Cooperative Study (ADCS) was designed to evaluate the reliability and validity of cognitive assessment measures that might be valuable additions to the Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale (ADAS) or other concise batteries used in antidementia drug trials. As part of an overall ADCS protocol to develop new instruments to be used in trials of treatments for Alzheimer's disease (AD), patients with mild to moderate AD and cognitively normal elderly were administered a battery of five tests at least three times over 1 year. The tests included word list learning with delayed free recall, a recognition memory test for faces, a series of letter and digit cancellation tests to measure concentration, tests of praxis, and a series of maze completion tasks designed to assess planning and executive function. A version of the digit cancellation task was reliable and sensitive to a broad range of dementia severity so that it could provide a useful addition to the present version of the ADAS. Performance on the word learning task with delayed recall and a subset of the mazes task were impaired even in mild AD, so these tasks may be useful in trials involving mild or at-risk subjects. Performances on the facial recognition task and on the praxis tasks were not related to dementia severity, so these tasks would not be useful to evaluate treatments. Therefore, the major outcome of this investigation was the identification of some potential addtions to the present ADAS that extend both the cognitive domains and the range of symptom severity covered.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Mohs, R. C., Knopman, D. S., Petersen, R. C., Ferris, S. H., Ernesto, C., Grundman, M., et al. (1997). Development of Cognitive Instruments for Use in Clinical Trials of Antidementia Drugs. Alzheimer Disease & Associated Disorders. https://doi.org/10.1097/00002093-199700112-00003
Vancouver
Mohs RC, Knopman DS, Petersen RC, Ferris SH, Ernesto C, Grundman M, et al. Development of Cognitive Instruments for Use in Clinical Trials of Antidementia Drugs. Alzheimer Disease & Associated Disorders. 1997. doi:10.1097/00002093-199700112-00003.
BibTeX
@article{mohs1997-37e2cc49,
author = {Mohs, Richard C. and Knopman, David S. and Petersen, Ronald Carl and Ferris, Steven H. and Ernesto, Chris and Grundman, Michael and Sano, Mary and Bieliauskas, Linas A. and Geldmacher, David and Clark, Chris M. and Thal, Leon J.},
title = {{Development of Cognitive Instruments for Use in Clinical Trials of Antidementia Drugs}},
journal = {Alzheimer Disease \& Associated Disorders},
year = {1997},
doi = {10.1097/00002093-199700112-00003},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1097/00002093-199700112-00003}
}
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 11 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.
Why it matters
Tested five cognitive tests in people with mild to moderate Alzheimer's disease and cognitively normal older adults over 1 year, looking for additions to the Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale (ADAS) used in drug trials. A digit cancellation task was reliable across dementia severity and word learning with delayed recall was impaired even in mild Alzheimer's, while facial recognition and praxis tasks were not related to dementia severity.
How this study scored 45/100
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. We have no data on strength of evidence, so that was left out: it earned 43 of the 95 points we could judge it on, which is 45 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 7 / 10 | Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Alzheimer Disease & Associated Disorders) |
| Journal's citation record | 1 / 4 | Alzheimer Disease & Associated Disorders: journal h-index 131 (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 | — / 5 | No evidence rating recorded — left out of this score |
| Peer-review validation | 10 / 10 | Peer-reviewed. Published as an article in a named peer-reviewed journal. |
| How recent | 1 / 5 | 1997 — older than 20 years, still counted |
| 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 693 times (OpenAlex, 2026-10-10) |
| Citations per year | 4 / 5 | 22.4 citations a year over 31 year(s) since 1997 |
| Impact for its field and year | 3 / 6 | Cited 4.1× 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 | 3 / 4 | Cited 143 times in 2024–2026 (2026 still in progress; OpenAlex) |
| Senior author's track record | 3 / 4 | Last-listed author Leon J. Thal: h-index 90 (OpenAlex, whole career) |
| Institution's track record | 2 / 3 | University of Michigan: institution h-index 2,240 (OpenAlex) |
| Multi-centre collaboration | 2 / 3 | OpenAlex lists 8 institution(s) in 1 country |
| Indexed in PubMed | 1 / 2 | Not in PubMed, but has a DOI |
| Free to read | 0 / 2 | Behind a paywall — scores zero |
| Points | 43 / 95 | Scored on 19 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 43 of the 95 points we could judge it on is 45 out of 100. |
| Total | 45 / 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.
Related studies in Cognitive tests and assessment
Also in Cognitive tests and assessment
109 studies in the library are filed under Cognitive tests and assessment with no topic tag they share with another; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed tour of them. The Cognitive tests and assessment hub.