2015
DOI: 10.1080/13854046.2015.1119312
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

How Do Scores on the ADAS-Cog, MMSE, and CDR-SOB Correspond?

Abstract: This study shows how scores on these three popular measures of cognitive dysfunction correspond to each other, which is very useful information for both researchers and clinicians.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

2
64
0

Year Published

2018
2018
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
5
2
2

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 104 publications
(66 citation statements)
references
References 9 publications
2
64
0
Order By: Relevance
“…e corresponding effect size was medium (Cohen's d � 0.661, 95% CI −0.638 to 1.921). Previous research has shown that MMSE is less precise than CDR-SOB and ADAS-Cog in classifying the severity of cognitive dysfunction [32]. erefore, to overcome the limitations of MMSE for MCI individuals, we also performed a subgroup analysis for ADAS-Cog scores (n � 590, SMD � 0.38, 95% CI 0.22 to 0.55, p < 0.00001, I 2 � 0%, the random-effect model; Figure 2) and CDR-SOB scores (n � 590, SMD � 0.44, 95% CI 0.24 to 0.64, p < 0.0001, I 2 � 27%, the random-effect model; Figure 2).…”
Section: Methodological Qualitymentioning
confidence: 95%
“…e corresponding effect size was medium (Cohen's d � 0.661, 95% CI −0.638 to 1.921). Previous research has shown that MMSE is less precise than CDR-SOB and ADAS-Cog in classifying the severity of cognitive dysfunction [32]. erefore, to overcome the limitations of MMSE for MCI individuals, we also performed a subgroup analysis for ADAS-Cog scores (n � 590, SMD � 0.38, 95% CI 0.22 to 0.55, p < 0.00001, I 2 � 0%, the random-effect model; Figure 2) and CDR-SOB scores (n � 590, SMD � 0.44, 95% CI 0.24 to 0.64, p < 0.0001, I 2 � 27%, the random-effect model; Figure 2).…”
Section: Methodological Qualitymentioning
confidence: 95%
“…The substantial difference between MMSE and ADAS-cog data may be subjected to the dementia severity of patients among studies and the intrinsic variance of the instruments used, comprising various subdomains of cognition. MMSE is a brief screening tool assessing global cognitive impairment, and ADAS-cog score is more precise in exploring the cognitive function than the MMSE scale [ 28 ]. The different instruments used across studies limits the ability to calculate the pooled effect size among studies.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Case classification harmonization across cohorts was performed using the following rubric: cases with CERAD 0-1 and Braak 0-3 without dementia at last evaluation were defined as control (if Braak equals 3, then CERAD must equal 0); cases with CERAD 1-3 and Braak 3-6 without dementia at last evaluation were defined as AsymAD; cases with CERAD 2-3 and Braak 3-6 with dementia at last evaluation were defined as AD. Dementia was defined as MMSE <24, CASI score <81, or CDR ≥1, based on prior comparative study 121 . Mayo and UPenn cases were not included in the case harmonization scheme, and therefore preservation of consensus network modules in these cohorts provides an additional degree of robustness.…”
Section: Brain Tissue Samples and Case Classificationmentioning
confidence: 99%