Home › Research › Getting a diagnosis
Montreal Cognitive Assessment vs the Mini-Mental State Examination as a Screening Tool for Patients With Genetic Frontotemporal Dementia
Liset de Boer, Jackie M. Poos, Esther van den Berg, Julie F. H. De Houwer, Tine Swartenbroekx, Elise G.P. Dopper, Pam Boesjes, Najlae Tahboun et al.. Neurology, 2025-02-14
Topic: Risk, prevention and care in population studies
< 0.001] total scores differed significantly between groups, with controls (median MoCA 28.5, 95% CI 28.0-29.0; median MMSE 30, 95% CI 30.0-30.0) outperforming prodromal (median MoCA 26, 95% CI 23.0-27.0; median MMSE 29, 95% CI 27.5-29.5) and symptomatic (median MoCA 20.5, 95% CI 17.0-24.0; median MMSE 26, 95% CI 23.5-29.0) carriers. MoCA distinguished between presymptomatic carriers and controls (median MoCA 28, 95% CI 27.0-29.0), but MMSE did not. MoCA demonstrated superior discriminative ability compared with MMSE (MoCA area under the curve [AUC] = 0.87, 95% CI 0.81-0.94; MMSE AUC = 0.80, 95% CI 0.72-0.89). Its higher sensitivity and better discriminative power make MoCA a more valuable tool for cognitive screening in upcoming clinical trials targeting preclinical FTD. Future studies should aim for larger sample sizes from additional study centers.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
de Boer, L., Poos, J. M., van den Berg, E., De Houwer, J. F. H., Swartenbroekx, T., Dopper, E. G., et al. (2025). Montreal Cognitive Assessment vs the Mini-Mental State Examination as a Screening Tool for Patients With Genetic Frontotemporal Dementia. Neurology. https://doi.org/10.1212/wnl.0000000000213401
Vancouver
de Boer L, Poos JM, van den Berg E, De Houwer JFH, Swartenbroekx T, Dopper EG, et al. Montreal Cognitive Assessment vs the Mini-Mental State Examination as a Screening Tool for Patients With Genetic Frontotemporal Dementia. Neurology. 2025. doi:10.1212/wnl.0000000000213401. PMID: 39951678.
BibTeX
@article{deboer2025-39951678,
author = {de Boer, Liset and Poos, Jackie M. and van den Berg, Esther and De Houwer, Julie F. H. and Swartenbroekx, Tine and Dopper, Elise G.P. and Boesjes, Pam and Tahboun, Najlae and others},
title = {{Montreal Cognitive Assessment vs the Mini-Mental State Examination as a Screening Tool for Patients With Genetic Frontotemporal Dementia}},
journal = {Neurology},
year = {2025},
doi = {10.1212/wnl.0000000000213401},
pmid = {39951678},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1212/wnl.0000000000213401}
}
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's author list ends in “et al.”, so not every author is named. Check the citation against the original before you use it.
Key findings
- < 0.001] total scores differed significantly between groups, with controls (median MoCA 28.5, 95% CI 28.0-29.0; median MMSE 30, 95% CI 30.0-30.0) outperforming prodromal (median MoCA 26, 95% CI 23.0-27.0; median MMSE 29, 95% CI 27.5-29.5) and symptomatic (median MoCA 20.5, 95% CI 17.0-24.0; median MMSE 26, 95% CI 23.5-29.0) carriers.
- MoCA distinguished between presymptomatic carriers and controls (median MoCA 28, 95% CI 27.0-29.0), but MMSE did not.
- MoCA demonstrated superior discriminative ability compared with MMSE (MoCA area under the curve [AUC] = 0.87, 95% CI 0.81-0.94; MMSE AUC = 0.80, 95% CI 0.72-0.89).
- Its higher sensitivity and better discriminative power make MoCA a more valuable tool for cognitive screening in upcoming clinical trials targeting preclinical FTD.
- Future studies should aim for larger sample sizes from additional study centers.
Why it matters
This study found the Montreal Cognitive Assessment distinguished presymptomatic genetic frontotemporal dementia carriers from controls while the Mini-Mental State Examination did not, and showed better discriminative ability overall. It is about cognitive screening for frontotemporal dementia, not about treating, curing or preventing Alzheimer's disease.
New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Getting a diagnosis →
Study details
- Study designcohort study
- Effect sizeAUC = 0.80
- Evidence strengthModerate
How this study scored 62/100
Published in a leading specialty journal, and it is a cohort study following people over time. Scored zero for sample size, studied in people and randomised / blinded because the record does not state it.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 9 / 10 | Tier 2 — leading specialty journal (Neurology) |
| Journal's citation record | 4 / 4 | Neurology: journal h-index 525 (OpenAlex, 2026-10-29) |
| Study design | 7 / 12 | A cohort study following people over time |
| Strength of evidence | 3 / 5 | Rated “moderate” in our summary |
| Peer-review validation | 10 / 10 | Peer-reviewed. Published as an article in a named peer-reviewed journal. |
| How recent | 4 / 5 | 2025 — within 3 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 | 3 / 3 | Effect reported with a statistic (interval, p-value, ratio or similar) |
| 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 | 3 / 7 | Cited 25 times (OpenAlex, 2026-10-10) |
| Citations per year | 3 / 5 | 8.3 citations a year over 3 year(s) since 2025 |
| Impact for its field and year | 4 / 6 | Cited 15.9× the average for papers of its field and year (OpenAlex FWCI) |
| Cited by studies here | 1 / 6 | Cited by 2 other studies in this library |
| Still being cited | 2 / 4 | Cited 25 times in 2024–2026 (2026 still in progress; OpenAlex) |
| Senior author's track record | 2 / 4 | Last-listed author Lize Corrine Jiskoot: h-index 44 (OpenAlex, whole career) |
| Institution's track record | 2 / 3 | University College London: institution h-index 2,029 (OpenAlex) |
| Multi-centre collaboration | 1 / 3 | OpenAlex lists 2 institution(s) in 2 countries |
| Indexed in PubMed | 2 / 2 | Indexed in PubMed (PMID 39951678) |
| Free to read | 2 / 2 | Free to read |
| Total | 62 / 100 | — |
What each of these 20 components measures, and what this score is not →
Read the original
Full text: free to read — OpenAlex lists this copy as free to read: the link above (checked 6 Feb 1020).
Studies this one cites
Referenced by this study and also in the alzhub library, so you can read them here.
Later studies that cite this one
2 studies in the alzhub library list this one in their references.
Related studies in Getting a diagnosis
Also tagged “examination”
840 studies in the library carry the topic tag “examination”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 840 tagged studies.