Reducing misclassification of mild cognitive impairment based on base rate information from the Uniform data set

Nikolai, Tomáš; Děchtěrenko, Filip; Yaffe, Beril; Georgi, Hana; Kopeček, Miloslav; Červenková, Markéta; Vyhnálek, Martin; Bezdíček, Ondřej

doi:10.1080/13825585.2021.2022593

Cited by 3 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 40 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Also, the NP criteria requires a cut-off score of 1 standard deviation (SD), instead of the widely used 1.5 SD below the mean relative to a normative sample [13]. A proportion of healthy older adults, due to natural variability, will obtain test scores falling below normative cut-off scores, incorrectly fulfilling the requirement of objective impairment [17,18]. An optimal cognitive testing battery, and requirements of the objective impairment criterion, should be sensitive enough to detect discreet cognitive deficits, and distinguish between the cognitively impaired and unimpaired.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Mild Cognitive Impairment, Reversion Rates, and Associated Factors: Comparison of Two Diagnostic Approaches

Overton

Sjögren

Elmståhl

et al. 2023

JAD

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: As mild cognitive impairment (MCI) is typically used to identify prodromal stages of dementia, it is essential to identify MCI criteria with high diagnostic stability and prediction of dementia. Moreover, further investigation into pinpointing key factors for reversion is required to foresee future prognosis of MCI patients accurately. Objective: To explore disparities in diagnostic stability by examining reversion rates produced by two operationalizations of the MCI definition: the widely applied Petersen criteria and a version of the Neuropsychological (NP) criteria and to identify cognitive, lifestyle, and health related factors for reversion. Methods: MCI was retrospectively classified in a sample from the Swedish community-based study Good Aging in Skåne with the Petersen criteria (n = 744, median follow-up = 7.0 years) and the NP criteria (n = 375, median follow-up, 6.7 years), respectively. Poisson regression models estimated the effect of various factors on the likelihood of incident reversion. Results: Reversion rates were 323/744 (43.4%, 95% confidence intervals (CI): 39.8; 47.0) and 181/375 (48.3% 95% CI: 43.2; 53.5) for the Petersen criteria and NP criteria, respectively. Participants with impairment in a single cognitive domain, regular alcohol consumption, living with someone, older age, and lower body mass index had a higher likelihood of reverting to normal. Conclusion: Reversion rates were similar for Petersen and NP criteria indicating that one definition is not superior to the other regarding diagnostic stability. Additionally, the results highlight important aspects such as multiple domain MCI, cohabitation, and the role of alcohol on predicting the trajectory of those diagnosed with MCI.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%