Home › Research › Disparities
Telephone-based identification of mild cognitive impairment and dementia in a multicultural cohort
Manly JJ, Schupf N, Stern Y, Brickman AM, Tang MX, Mayeux R.. Archives of neurology, 2011-05-01
Topic: Risk, prevention and care in population studies
Background Telephone-based interviews can be used for screening and to obtain key study outcomes when participants in longitudinal studies die or cannot be seen in person, but must be validated among ethnically and educationally diverse people. Objective To determine the accuracy of a telephone interview in classifying (1) demented from nondemented participants, (2) cognitively impaired participants from cognitively normal participants, and (3) participants with mild cognitive impairment (MCI) from those with normal cognition or (4) MCI from dementia among an ethnically and educationally diverse community-based sample. Method The sample consisted of 377 (30.5% non-Hispanic white, 34.7% non-Hispanic black, and 33.7% Caribbean Hispanic) older adults. The validation standard was diagnosis of dementia and MCI based on in-person evaluation. The Telephone Interview for Cognitive Status (TICS) and the Dementia Questionnaire (DQ) were administered within the same assessment wave. Results The sample included 256 people (67.9%) with normal cognition, 68 (18.0%) with MCI, and 53 (14.1%) with dementia. Validity of the TICS was comparable among non-Hispanic whites, non-Hispanic blacks, and Hispanics. Among non-Hispanic whites, the DQ had better discrimination of those with dementia from those without dementia and from those with MCI than among other racial/ethnic groups. Telephone measures discriminated best when used to differentiate demented from nondemented participants (88% sensitivity and 87% specificity for the TICS; 66% sensitivity and 89% specificity for DQ) and when used to differentiate cognitively normal participants from those with cognitive impairment (ie, MCI and dementia combined; 73% sensitivity and 77% specificity for the TICS; 49% sensitivity and 82% specificity for DQ). When demographics and prior memory test performance were used to calculate pretest probability, consideration of the telephone measures significantly improved diagnostic validity. Conclusions The TICS has high diagnostic validity for identification of dementia among ethnically diverse older adults, especially when supported by the DQ and prior visit data. However, telephone interview data were unable to reliably distinguish MCI from normal cognition.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Manly, J. J., Schupf, N., Stern, Y., Brickman, A. M., Tang, M. X., & Mayeux, R. (2011). Telephone-based identification of mild cognitive impairment and dementia in a multicultural cohort. Archives of neurology. https://doi.org/10.1001/archneurol.2011.88
Vancouver
Manly JJ, Schupf N, Stern Y, Brickman AM, Tang MX, Mayeux R. Telephone-based identification of mild cognitive impairment and dementia in a multicultural cohort. Archives of neurology. 2011. doi:10.1001/archneurol.2011.88. PMID: 21555635.
BibTeX
@article{manly2011-21555635,
author = {Manly, J. J. and Schupf, N. and Stern, Y. and Brickman, A. M. and Tang, M. X. and Mayeux, R.},
title = {{Telephone-based identification of mild cognitive impairment and dementia in a multicultural cohort}},
journal = {Archives of neurology},
year = {2011},
doi = {10.1001/archneurol.2011.88},
pmid = {21555635},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1001/archneurol.2011.88}
}
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
- Results The sample included 256 people (67.9%) with normal cognition, 68 (18.0%) with MCI, and 53 (14.1%) with dementia.
- When demographics and prior memory test performance were used to calculate pretest probability, consideration of the telephone measures significantly improved diagnostic validity.
Why it matters
This study tested whether telephone-based interviews could accurately identify dementia and mild cognitive impairment in an ethnically and educationally diverse sample. It concerns a method for screening and classifying cognitive problems, not a treatment, cure, or prevention.
New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Disparities →
Study details
- Study designlongitudinal study
- Participants256
- Effect size30.5%; 34.7%; 33.7%
- Evidence strengthModerate
How this study scored 61/100
Published in a peer-reviewed journal, and it is a longitudinal study following the same people over time. Scored zero for randomised / blinded because the record does not state it.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 7 / 10 | Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Archives of neurology) |
| Journal's citation record | 3 / 4 | Archives of Neurology: journal h-index 353 (OpenAlex, 2026-10-29) |
| Study design | 7 / 12 | A longitudinal study following the same 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 | 1 / 5 | 2011 — within 20 year(s) of the newest study here |
| Sample size | 2 / 4 | 256 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 114 times (OpenAlex, 2026-10-10) |
| Citations per year | 2 / 5 | 6.7 citations a year over 17 year(s) since 2011 |
| Impact for its field and year | 3 / 6 | Cited 3.4× the average for papers of its field and year (OpenAlex FWCI) |
| Cited by studies here | 2 / 6 | Cited by 7 other studies in this library |
| Still being cited | 2 / 4 | Cited 28 times in 2024–2026 (2026 still in progress; OpenAlex) |
| Senior author's track record | 4 / 4 | Last-listed author Richard P Mayeux: h-index 158 (OpenAlex, whole career) |
| Institution's track record | 2 / 3 | Columbia University: institution h-index 1,824 (OpenAlex) |
| Multi-centre collaboration | 1 / 3 | OpenAlex lists 2 institution(s) in 1 country |
| Indexed in PubMed | 2 / 2 | Indexed in PubMed (PMID 21555635) |
| Free to read | 0 / 2 | Behind a paywall — scores zero |
| Total | 61 / 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
7 studies in the alzhub library list this one in their references.
Related studies in Disparities
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.