Home › Research › Cognitive tests and assessment
Montreal Cognitive Assessment: One Cutoff Never Fits All
Wong A, Law LS, Liu W, Wang Z, Lo ES, Lau A, Wong LK, Mok VC.. Stroke, 2015-10-15
Topic: Risk, prevention and care in population studies
Background and purpose The objective of this study is to examine the discrepancy between single versus age and education corrected cutoff scores in classifying performance on the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) in patients with stroke or transient ischemic attack. Methods MoCA norms were collected from 794 functionally independent and stroke- and dementia-free persons aged ≥65 years. magnetic resonance imaging was used to exclude healthy controls with significant brain pathology and medial temporal lobe atrophy. Cutoff scores at 16th, 7th, and 2nd percentiles by age and education were derived for the MoCA and MoCA 5-minute Protocol.
Key findings
- Methods MoCA norms were collected from 794 functionally independent and stroke- and dementia-free persons aged ≥65 years. magnetic resonance imaging was used to exclude healthy controls with significant brain pathology and medial temporal lobe atrophy.
- Cutoff scores at 16th, 7th, and 2nd percentiles by age and education were derived for the MoCA and MoCA 5-minute Protocol.
- MoCA performance in 919 patients with stroke or transient ischemic attack was classified using the single and norm-derived cutoff scores.
- Results The norms for the Hong Kong version of the MoCA total and domain scores and the total score of the MoCA 5-minute protocol are described.
Why it matters
This study examined whether using age- and education-adjusted cutoff scores changes how the Montreal Cognitive Assessment classifies stroke patients. It does not test any treatment, cure, or prevention for Alzheimer's disease.
Study details
- Participants919
- Effect size65.1%; 25.7%; 45.2%
- Evidence strengthLow
How this study scored 50/100
Published in a peer-reviewed journal. Scored zero for study design and randomised / blinded because the record does not state it.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 7 / 10 | Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Stroke) |
| Journal's citation record | 3 / 4 | Stroke: journal h-index 455 (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 | 2 / 4 | 919 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 160 times (OpenAlex, 2026-10-10) |
| Citations per year | 3 / 5 | 12.3 citations a year over 13 year(s) since 2015 |
| Impact for its field and year | 3 / 6 | Cited 7.3× 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 50 times in 2024–2026 (2026 still in progress; OpenAlex) |
| Senior author's track record | 3 / 4 | Last-listed author Vincent Mok: h-index 84 (OpenAlex, whole career) |
| Institution's track record | 1 / 3 | Chinese University of Hong Kong: institution h-index 1,100 (OpenAlex) |
| Multi-centre collaboration | 1 / 3 | OpenAlex lists 2 institution(s) in 1 country |
| Indexed in PubMed | 2 / 2 | Indexed in PubMed (PMID 26470772) |
| Free to read | 0 / 2 | Behind a paywall — scores zero |
| Total | 50 / 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 8 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
Wong, A., Law, L. S., Liu, W., Wang, Z., Lo, E. S., Lau, A., et al. (2015). Montreal Cognitive Assessment: One Cutoff Never Fits All. Stroke. https://doi.org/10.1161/strokeaha.115.011226
Vancouver
Wong A, Law LS, Liu W, Wang Z, Lo ES, Lau A, et al. Montreal Cognitive Assessment: One Cutoff Never Fits All. Stroke. 2015. doi:10.1161/strokeaha.115.011226. PMID: 26470772.
BibTeX
@article{wong2015-26470772,
author = {Wong, A. and Law, L. S. and Liu, W. and Wang, Z. and Lo, E. S. and Lau, A. and Wong, L. K. and Mok, V. C.},
title = {{Montreal Cognitive Assessment: One Cutoff Never Fits All}},
journal = {Stroke},
year = {2015},
doi = {10.1161/strokeaha.115.011226},
pmid = {26470772},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1161/strokeaha.115.011226}
}
Studies this one cites
Referenced by this study and also in the alzhub library, so you can read them here.
Related studies in Cognitive tests and assessment
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.