Home › Research › Cognitive tests and assessment
What is the clinically relevant change on the ADAS-Cog?
Schrag A, Schott JM, Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative.. Journal of neurology, neurosurgery, and psychiatry, 2011-10-21
Topic: Risk, prevention and care in population studies
Objective To establish the minimal clinically relevant change (MCRC) on the Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale-Cognitive (ADAS-Cog) for patients with mild Alzheimer's disease (AD). Setting 59 recruiting sites for the Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative. Patients Outpatients with AD in the Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative.
Key findings
- Setting 59 recruiting sites for the Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative.
- Patients Outpatients with AD in the Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative.
- Main outcome measures The authors applied anchor-based MCRC methodology comparing ADAS-Cog change against clinicians' judgement of clinically relevant worsening between baseline and 6 months in four domains: memory and non-memory cognitive performance; Clinical Dementia Rating Scale; and Functional Assessment Questionnaire.
- The analysis was repeated for the 6-12-month interval.
Why it matters
This study tried to work out how many points a person's score on the ADAS-Cog memory-and-thinking test must change before clinicians judge it a real worsening in mild Alzheimer's disease. Using outpatients from 59 Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative sites, it compared score changes over 6 and 12 months with clinicians' judgements of worsening in memory, other thinking skills, dementia rating and daily function. It is about how to interpret change on a test, not about treating, curing or preventing the disease.
Study details
- Study designcohort study
- Participants41
- Evidence strengthModerate
How this study scored 56/100
Published in a peer-reviewed journal, and it is a cohort study following people over time. Scored zero for effect reported 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 54 of the 96 points we could judge it on, which is 56 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 7 / 10 | Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Journal of neurology, neurosurgery, and psychiatry) |
| Journal's citation record | 3 / 4 | Journal of Neurology Neurosurgery & Psychiatry: journal h-index 336 (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 | 1 / 5 | 2012 — within 20 year(s) of the newest study here |
| Sample size | 1 / 4 | 41 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 | 5 / 7 | Cited 143 times (OpenAlex, 2026-10-10) |
| Citations per year | 3 / 5 | 8.9 citations a year over 16 year(s) since 2012 |
| Impact for its field and year | 1 / 6 | Cited 1.0× the average for papers of its field and year (OpenAlex FWCI) |
| Cited by studies here | 3 / 6 | Cited by 18 other studies in this library |
| Still being cited | 2 / 4 | Cited 35 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 | 2 / 3 | University College London: institution h-index 2,029 (OpenAlex) |
| Multi-centre collaboration | 1 / 3 | OpenAlex lists 3 institution(s) in 1 country |
| Indexed in PubMed | 2 / 2 | Indexed in PubMed (PMID 22019547) |
| Free to read | 0 / 2 | Behind a paywall — scores zero |
| Points | 54 / 96 | Scored on 19 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 54 of the 96 points we could judge it on is 56 out of 100. |
| Total | 56 / 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.
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. Check the citation against the original before you use it.
APA 7th
Schrag, A., Schott, J. M., & Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative. (2012). What is the clinically relevant change on the ADAS-Cog? Journal of neurology, neurosurgery, and psychiatry. https://doi.org/10.1136/jnnp-2011-300881
Vancouver
Schrag A, Schott JM, Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative. What is the clinically relevant change on the ADAS-Cog? Journal of neurology, neurosurgery, and psychiatry. 2012. doi:10.1136/jnnp-2011-300881. PMID: 22019547.
BibTeX
@article{schrag2012-22019547,
author = {Schrag, A. and Schott, J. M. and {Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative}},
title = {{What is the clinically relevant change on the ADAS-Cog?}},
journal = {Journal of neurology, neurosurgery, and psychiatry},
year = {2012},
doi = {10.1136/jnnp-2011-300881},
pmid = {22019547},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1136/jnnp-2011-300881}
}
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
18 studies in the alzhub library list this one in their references. Showing the 8 highest-scoring.