Home › Research › Cognitive tests and assessment
The GPCOG: a new screening test for dementia designed for general practice
Brodaty H, Pond D, Kemp NM, Luscombe G, Harding L, Berman K, Huppert FA.. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society, 2002-03-01
Topic: Risk, prevention and care in population studies
Objectives To design and test a brief, efficient dementia-screening instrument for use by general practitioners (GPs). Design The General Practitioner Assessment of Cognition (GPCOG) consists of cognitive test items and historical questions asked of an informant. The validity of the measure was assessed by comparison with the criterion standard of diagnoses of dementia derived from the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (Fourth Edition).
Key findings
- Design The General Practitioner Assessment of Cognition (GPCOG) consists of cognitive test items and historical questions asked of an informant.
- The validity of the measure was assessed by comparison with the criterion standard of diagnoses of dementia derived from the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (Fourth Edition).
- Participants Sixty-seven GPs administered the GPCOG to 283 community-dwelling patients aged 50 to 74 with memory complaints or aged 75 and older.
- Measurements The Cambridge Mental Disorder of the Elderly Examination, the Abbreviated Mental Test (AMT), the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE), the 15-item Geriatric Depression Scale, and the 12-item Short-Form Health Survey.
Why it matters
This paper describes the design and testing of the GPCOG, a brief dementia-screening instrument for use by general practitioners that consists of cognitive test items and historical questions asked of an informant. Its validity was assessed by comparison with the criterion standard of diagnoses of dementia derived from the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (Fourth Edition).
Study details
- Effect size71.4%
- Evidence strengthLow
How this study scored 49/100
Published in a peer-reviewed journal. Scored zero for study design, sample size, studied in people and randomised / blinded because the record does not state it.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 7 / 10 | Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Journal of the American Geriatrics Society) |
| Journal's citation record | 3 / 4 | Journal of the American Geriatrics Society: journal h-index 344 (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 | 2002 — older than 20 years, still counted |
| Sample size | 0 / 4 | Participant count not stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Effect reported | 2 / 3 | Effect reported as a number, without an interval or test |
| 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 | 6 / 7 | Cited 494 times (OpenAlex, 2026-10-10) |
| Citations per year | 3 / 5 | 19.0 citations a year over 26 year(s) since 2002 |
| Impact for its field and year | 2 / 6 | Cited 2.8× the average for papers of its field and year (OpenAlex FWCI) |
| Cited by studies here | 3 / 6 | Cited by 23 other studies in this library |
| Still being cited | 3 / 4 | Cited 68 times in 2024–2026 (2026 still in progress; OpenAlex) |
| Senior author's track record | 3 / 4 | Last-listed author Felicia A. Huppert: h-index 76 (OpenAlex, whole career) |
| Institution's track record | 2 / 3 | University of Cambridge: institution h-index 1,973 (OpenAlex) |
| Multi-centre collaboration | 1 / 3 | OpenAlex lists 3 institution(s) in 2 countries |
| Indexed in PubMed | 2 / 2 | Indexed in PubMed (PMID 11943052) |
| Free to read | 0 / 2 | Behind a paywall — scores zero |
| Total | 49 / 100 | — |
What each of these 20 components measures, and what this score is not →
Read the original
May need a subscription Unpaywall, Europe PMC and OpenAlex found no free copy of the full text (checked 10 Oct 2026), 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 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
Brodaty, H., Pond, D., Kemp, N. M., Luscombe, G., Harding, L., Berman, K., et al. (2002). The GPCOG: a new screening test for dementia designed for general practice. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1532-5415.2002.50122.x
Vancouver
Brodaty H, Pond D, Kemp NM, Luscombe G, Harding L, Berman K, et al. The GPCOG: a new screening test for dementia designed for general practice. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society. 2002. doi:10.1046/j.1532-5415.2002.50122.x. PMID: 11943052.
BibTeX
@article{brodaty2002-11943052,
author = {Brodaty, H. and Pond, D. and Kemp, N. M. and Luscombe, G. and Harding, L. and Berman, K. and Huppert, F. A.},
title = {{The GPCOG: a new screening test for dementia designed for general practice}},
journal = {Journal of the American Geriatrics Society},
year = {2002},
doi = {10.1046/j.1532-5415.2002.50122.x},
pmid = {11943052},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1532-5415.2002.50122.x}
}
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
23 studies in the alzhub library list this one in their references. Showing the 8 highest-scoring.
Related studies in Cognitive tests and assessment
Also tagged “prevalence”
1,224 studies in the library carry the topic tag “prevalence”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 1,224 tagged studies.