↓ Skip to main content

Relationship between the Montreal Cognitive Assessment and Mini-mental State Examination for assessment of mild cognitive impairment in older adults

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Geriatrics, September 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (92nd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
2 news outlets
blogs
1 blog
twitter
3 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
281 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
459 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Relationship between the Montreal Cognitive Assessment and Mini-mental State Examination for assessment of mild cognitive impairment in older adults
Published in
BMC Geriatrics, September 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12877-015-0103-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Paula T. Trzepacz, Helen Hochstetler, Shufang Wang, Brett Walker, Andrew J. Saykin

Abstract

The Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) was developed to enable earlier detection of mild cognitive impairment (MCI) relative to familiar multi-domain tests like the Mini-Mental State Exam (MMSE). Clinicians need to better understand the relationship between MoCA and MMSE scores. For this cross-sectional study, we analyzed 219 healthy control (HC), 299 MCI, and 100 Alzheimer's disease (AD) dementia cases from the Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (ADNI)-GO/2 database to evaluate MMSE and MoCA score distributions and select MoCA values to capture early and late MCI cases. Stepwise variable selection in logistic regression evaluated relative value of four test domains for separating MCI from HC. Functional Activities Questionnaire (FAQ) was evaluated as a strategy to separate dementia from MCI. Equi-percentile equating produced a translation grid for MoCA against MMSE scores. Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) analyses evaluated lower cutoff scores for capturing the most MCI cases. Most dementia cases scored abnormally, while MCI and HC score distributions overlapped on each test. Most MCI cases scored ≥17 on MoCA (96.3 %) and ≥24 on MMSE (98.3 %). The ceiling effect (28-30 points) for MCI and HC was less using MoCA (18.1 %) versus MMSE (71.4 %). MoCA and MMSE scores correlated most for dementia (r = 0.86; versus MCI r = 0.60; HC r = 0.43). Equi-percentile equating showed a MoCA score of 18 was equivalent to MMSE of 24. ROC analysis found MoCA ≥ 17 as the cutoff between MCI and dementia that emphasized high sensitivity (92.3 %) to capture MCI cases. The core and orientation domains in both tests best distinguished HC from MCI groups, whereas comprehension/executive function and attention/calculation were not helpful. Mean FAQ scores were significantly higher and a greater proportion had abnormal FAQ scores in dementia than MCI and HC. MoCA and MMSE were more similar for dementia cases, but MoCA distributes MCI cases across a broader score range with less ceiling effect. A cutoff of ≥17 on the MoCA may help capture early and late MCI cases; depending on the level of sensitivity desired, ≥18 or 19 could be used. Functional assessment can help exclude dementia cases. MoCA scores are translatable to the MMSE to facilitate comparison.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 459 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Germany 1 <1%
Bulgaria 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Japan 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 453 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 78 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 65 14%
Student > Bachelor 64 14%
Researcher 51 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 31 7%
Other 79 17%
Unknown 91 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 119 26%
Psychology 72 16%
Neuroscience 50 11%
Nursing and Health Professions 33 7%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 20 4%
Other 59 13%
Unknown 106 23%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 25. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 12 February 2021.
All research outputs
#1,015,966
of 18,644,511 outputs
Outputs from BMC Geriatrics
#161
of 2,272 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#21,230
of 273,529 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Geriatrics
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 18,644,511 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,272 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.0. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 273,529 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them