Home › Research › Getting a diagnosis
Sensitivity and specificity of the Montreal cognitive assessment using U.S. National alzheimer coordinating centre uniform data set: a retrospective analysis of 16,309 participants
Youssef A. Ismail, Huda A. Auf, Shahd A. Sadik, Nada M. Ahmed, Yasmeen Ali. BMC Neurology, 2025-09-23
Topic: Risk, prevention and care in population studies
This study utilized an initial dataset of 188,700 participant records from NACC. After applying inclusion criteria, 16,309 participants were included. The participants had complete diagnostic information, clinician-conducted cognitive assessments, and MoCA scores. The participants were categorized into three groups: 7,624 with no cognitive impairment (NoCI), 4,893 with CI, and 3,792 with dementia. This study focused on MoCA scores, revealing significant differences among diagnostic groups. ROC analysis demonstrated the MoCA's strong diagnostic capability, with AUC values significantly above 0.5 (P <.001). Sensitivity and specificity were calculated in at the literature-recommended cutoff scores of 26 and 21, while the optimal cutoff scores were identified as (< 24) for detecting MCI and (< 21) for dementia based on the Youden index in reference to individuals with no cognitive impairment. Although PPV was generally low, the high NPV across comparisons underscores the MoCA's effectiveness in ruling out cognitive impairment. The study confirms MoCA as an effective tool for detecting dementia, showing 83% sensitivity and 82% specificity at a cutoff value of 21. With a high NPV of 94%, MoCA is particularly reliable for ruling out dementia. Its ability to detect MCI is moderate, with a sensitivity of 77.3% at cutoff of 24 among normal population.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Ismail, Y. A., Auf, H. A., Sadik, S. A., Ahmed, N. M., & Ali, Y. (2025). Sensitivity and specificity of the Montreal cognitive assessment using U.S. National alzheimer coordinating centre uniform data set: a retrospective analysis of 16,309 participants. BMC Neurology. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12883-025-04190-9
Vancouver
Ismail YA, Auf HA, Sadik SA, Ahmed NM, Ali Y. Sensitivity and specificity of the Montreal cognitive assessment using U.S. National alzheimer coordinating centre uniform data set: a retrospective analysis of 16,309 participants. BMC Neurology. 2025. doi:10.1186/s12883-025-04190-9. PMID: 40988047.
BibTeX
@article{ismail2025-40988047,
author = {Ismail, Youssef A. and Auf, Huda A. and Sadik, Shahd A. and Ahmed, Nada M. and Ali, Yasmeen},
title = {{Sensitivity and specificity of the Montreal cognitive assessment using U.S. National alzheimer coordinating centre uniform data set: a retrospective analysis of 16,309 participants}},
journal = {BMC Neurology},
year = {2025},
doi = {10.1186/s12883-025-04190-9},
pmid = {40988047},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1186/s12883-025-04190-9}
}
Built from the record alzhub holds for this paper, not looked up. Volume, issue and page numbers are not held in the record. Check the citation against the original before you use it.
Key findings
- This study utilized an initial dataset of 188,700 participant records from NACC.
- After applying inclusion criteria, 16,309 participants were included.
- The participants had complete diagnostic information, clinician-conducted cognitive assessments, and MoCA scores.
- The participants were categorized into three groups: 7,624 with no cognitive impairment (NoCI), 4,893 with CI, and 3,792 with dementia.
- This study focused on MoCA scores, revealing significant differences among diagnostic groups.
Why it matters
This analysis of 16,309 participants found the Montreal Cognitive Assessment detected dementia with 83% sensitivity and 82% specificity at a cutoff of 21, and was particularly reliable for ruling out dementia with a high negative predictive value of 94%. Its ability to detect mild cognitive impairment was moderate, with 77.3% sensitivity at a cutoff of 24.
New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Getting a diagnosis →
Study details
- Participants16,309
- Effect size77.3%
- Evidence strengthLow
How this study scored 49/100
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 senior author's track record, so that was left out: it earned 47 of the 96 points we could judge it on, which is 49 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 7 / 10 | Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (BMC Neurology) |
| Journal's citation record | 1 / 4 | BMC Neurology: journal h-index 122 (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 | 4 / 5 | 2025 — within 3 year(s) of the newest study here |
| Sample size | 4 / 4 | 16,309 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 | 3 / 7 | Cited 21 times (OpenAlex, 2026-10-10) |
| Citations per year | 2 / 5 | 7.0 citations a year over 3 year(s) since 2025 |
| Impact for its field and year | 4 / 6 | Cited 13.3× 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 | 2 / 4 | Cited 21 times in 2024–2026 (2026 still in progress; OpenAlex) |
| Senior author's track record | — / 4 | Senior author's record not available — left out of this score |
| Institution's track record | 0 / 3 | Port Said University: institution h-index 122 (OpenAlex) |
| Multi-centre collaboration | 0 / 3 | OpenAlex lists 1 institution(s) in 1 country — scores zero (affiliation lists can be incomplete) |
| Indexed in PubMed | 2 / 2 | Indexed in PubMed (PMID 40988047) |
| Free to read | 2 / 2 | Free to read |
| Points | 47 / 96 | Scored on 19 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 47 of the 96 points we could judge it on is 49 out of 100. |
| Total | 49 / 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. Showing 12 of 16.
Related studies in Getting a diagnosis
Also tagged “mini-mental”
840 studies in the library carry the topic tag “mini-mental”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 840 tagged studies.