Home › Research › Risk factors
IPA survey of brief cognitive screening instruments
Shulman KI, Herrmann N, Brodaty H, Chiu H, Lawlor B, Ritchie K, Scanlan JM.. International psychogeriatrics, 2006-02-08
Topic: Brain imaging, connectivity and assessment
Background and objectives Cognitive screening is a "first step" in detecting dementia and other neuropsychiatric syndromes and hence represents an important public health and clinical initiative. A plethora of cognitive screening instruments has been advocated in recent years, but the extent to which these instruments are used or their effectiveness is not well known. An International Psychogeriatric Association (IPA) survey was designed to determine which cognitive screening instruments were used most frequently by clinicians with special expertise in the neuropsychiatric aspects of old age and also to determine the ones considered most useful by these specialists. Method Under the auspices of the IPA, the survey was mailed in the fall of 2004 to all IPA members as well as members of the American and Canadian Associations of Geriatric Psychiatry. The survey inquired about demographic information, the frequency of use of cognitive screening instruments, and the value attributed to the cognitive screening instruments. Participants also had an opportunity to provide written commentary. Results A total of 334 completed surveys were processed. The majority of respondents were geriatric psychiatrists (58%). Of the 20 different instruments that were listed on the survey, only six were selected as "routinely" or "often used" by the survey respondents. These instruments in declining order were: (1) the Folstein Mini-mental State Examination; (2) the Clock Drawing Test; (3) Delayed Word Recall; (4) the Verbal Fluency Test; (5) Similarities; and (6) the Trail Making Test. "Effectiveness" and "ease of administration" were the test characteristics most highly predictive of frequency of use. Open-ended comments highlighted patient factors that continue to provide challenges, including ethnicity/culture, language, education/literacy, and sensory impairment. Respondents concluded that "no single test is adequate." Conclusions Psychogeriatricians worldwide routinely use a relatively small number of brief cognitive screening instruments. Further evaluation is necessary as the need increases for cognitive screening guidelines that inform public health initiatives related to dementia and neuropsychiatric syndromes.
Key findings
- Results A total of 334 completed surveys were processed.
- Respondents concluded that "no single test is adequate." Conclusions Psychogeriatricians worldwide routinely use a relatively small number of brief cognitive screening instruments.
New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Risk factors, ranked →
Study details
- Participants334
- Evidence strengthLow
How this study scored 46/100
Published in a peer-reviewed journal. Scored zero for study design, effect reported and randomised / blinded because the record does not state it. We have no data on journal's citation record, times cited, citations per year, impact for its field and year, cited by studies here, still being cited, senior author's track record and institution's track record, so those were left out: it earned 28 of the 61 points we could judge it on, which is 46 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 7 / 10 | Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (International psychogeriatrics) |
| Journal's citation record | — / 4 | No journal record from OpenAlex — left out of this score |
| 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 | 2006 — older than 20 years, still counted |
| Sample size | 2 / 4 | 334 participants |
| Effect reported | 0 / 3 | No effect size reported — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| 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 | — / 7 | No citation count (not found in OpenAlex) — left out of this score |
| Citations per year | — / 5 | No citation count or no year — left out of this score |
| Impact for its field and year | — / 6 | No field-weighted citation impact (OpenAlex has none yet) — left out of this score |
| Cited by studies here | — / 6 | Not yet checked against this library's citation graph — left out of this score |
| Still being cited | — / 4 | No yearly citation counts — left out of this score |
| Senior author's track record | — / 4 | Senior author's record not available — left out of this score |
| Institution's track record | — / 3 | No institution listed in OpenAlex — left out of this score |
| Multi-centre collaboration | 2 / 3 | PubMed indexes it as a multicentre study |
| Indexed in PubMed | 2 / 2 | Indexed in PubMed (PMID 16466586) |
| Free to read | 0 / 2 | Behind a paywall — scores zero |
| Points | 28 / 61 | Scored on 12 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 28 of the 61 points we could judge it on is 46 out of 100. |
| Total | 46 / 100 | — |
What each of these 20 components measures, and what this score is not →
Read the original
Free copy unknown: no free-copy check has an answer for this record yet. That does not mean it is paywalled.
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
Shulman, K. I., Herrmann, N., Brodaty, H., Chiu, H., Lawlor, B., Ritchie, K., et al. (2006). IPA survey of brief cognitive screening instruments. International psychogeriatrics. https://doi.org/10.1017/s1041610205002693
Vancouver
Shulman KI, Herrmann N, Brodaty H, Chiu H, Lawlor B, Ritchie K, et al. IPA survey of brief cognitive screening instruments. International psychogeriatrics. 2006. doi:10.1017/s1041610205002693. PMID: 16466586.
BibTeX
@article{shulman2006-16466586,
author = {Shulman, K. I. and Herrmann, N. and Brodaty, H. and Chiu, H. and Lawlor, B. and Ritchie, K. and Scanlan, J. M.},
title = {{IPA survey of brief cognitive screening instruments}},
journal = {International psychogeriatrics},
year = {2006},
doi = {10.1017/s1041610205002693},
pmid = {16466586},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1017/s1041610205002693}
}
Related studies in Risk factors
Also tagged “computerized”
238 studies in the library carry the topic tag “computerized”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 238 tagged studies.