Home › Research › Getting a diagnosis
Validation of the Addenbrooke's Cognitive Examination III in frontotemporal dementia and Alzheimer's disease
Hsieh S, Schubert S, Hoon C, Mioshi E, Hodges JR.. Dementia and geriatric cognitive disorders, 2013-08-15
Topic: Amyloid, tau and blood-test diagnosis
Background/aims The aims of this study were to validate the newly developed version of the Addenbrooke's Cognitive Examination (ACE-III) against standardised neuropsychological tests and its predecessor (ACE-R) in early dementia. Methods A total of 61 patients with dementia (frontotemporal dementia, FTD, n = 33, and Alzheimer's disease, AD, n = 28) and 25 controls were included in the study. Results ACE-III cognitive domains correlated significantly with standardised neuropsychological tests used in the assessment of attention, language, verbal memory and visuospatial function. The ACE-III also compared very favourably with its predecessor, the ACE-R, with similar levels of sensitivity and specificity. Conclusion The results of this study provide objective validation of the ACE-III as a screening tool for cognitive deficits in FTD and AD.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Hsieh, S., Schubert, S., Hoon, C., Mioshi, E., & Hodges, JR. (2013). Validation of the Addenbrooke's Cognitive Examination III in frontotemporal dementia and Alzheimer's disease. Dementia and geriatric cognitive disorders. https://doi.org/10.1159/000351671
Vancouver
Hsieh S, Schubert S, Hoon C, Mioshi E, Hodges JR. Validation of the Addenbrooke's Cognitive Examination III in frontotemporal dementia and Alzheimer's disease. Dementia and geriatric cognitive disorders. 2013. doi:10.1159/000351671. PMID: 23949210.
BibTeX
@article{hsieh2013-23949210,
author = {Hsieh, S. and Schubert, S. and Hoon, C. and Mioshi, E. and Hodges, JR.},
title = {{Validation of the Addenbrooke's Cognitive Examination III in frontotemporal dementia and Alzheimer's disease}},
journal = {Dementia and geriatric cognitive disorders},
year = {2013},
doi = {10.1159/000351671},
pmid = {23949210},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1159/000351671}
}
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 ACE-III cognitive domains correlated significantly with standardised neuropsychological tests used in the assessment of attention, language, verbal memory and visuospatial function.
- Conclusion The results of this study provide objective validation of the ACE-III as a screening tool for cognitive deficits in FTD and AD.
Why it matters
This study validated the ACE-III as a screening tool for cognitive deficits in frontotemporal dementia and Alzheimer's disease. It is about improving detection of cognitive problems, not about treating, curing or preventing Alzheimer's disease.
New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Getting a diagnosis →
Study details
- Participants33
- Evidence strengthLow
Limitations
The validation sample was small (61 patients and 25 controls total), so its performance in larger or more diverse clinical populations is not established by this study alone.
How this study scored 53/100
Published in a peer-reviewed journal. Scored zero for study design, effect reported and randomised / blinded because the record does not state it.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 7 / 10 | Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Dementia and geriatric cognitive disorders) |
| Journal's citation record | 1 / 4 | Dementia and Geriatric Cognitive Disorders: journal h-index 149 (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 | 2013 — within 20 year(s) of the newest study here |
| Sample size | 1 / 4 | 33 participants |
| Effect reported | 0 / 3 | No effect size reported — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| 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 | 6 / 7 | Cited 979 times (OpenAlex, 2026-10-10) |
| Citations per year | 5 / 5 | 65.3 citations a year over 15 year(s) since 2013 |
| Impact for its field and year | 4 / 6 | Cited 18.8× the average for papers of its field and year (OpenAlex FWCI) |
| Cited by studies here | 3 / 6 | Cited by 22 other studies in this library |
| Still being cited | 4 / 4 | Cited 279 times in 2024–2026 (2026 still in progress; OpenAlex) |
| Senior author's track record | 3 / 4 | Last-listed author John R. Hodges: h-index 99 (OpenAlex, whole career) |
| Institution's track record | 1 / 3 | UNSW Sydney: institution h-index 1,101 (OpenAlex) |
| Multi-centre collaboration | 1 / 3 | OpenAlex lists 2 institution(s) in 1 country |
| Indexed in PubMed | 2 / 2 | Indexed in PubMed (PMID 23949210) |
| Free to read | 0 / 2 | Behind a paywall — scores zero |
| Total | 53 / 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.
Related
Studies in the library that share something with this one. The line above each title says what.
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
22 studies in the alzhub library list this one in their references. Showing the 8 highest-scoring.
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.