↓ 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 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (94th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (93rd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
3 news outlets
blogs
1 blog
twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
436 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
578 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, for the Alzheimer’s Disease Neuroimaging Initiative

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.

X Demographics

X Demographics

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

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 578 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 572 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 87 15%
Student > Bachelor 74 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 72 12%
Researcher 63 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 30 5%
Other 101 17%
Unknown 151 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 137 24%
Psychology 78 13%
Neuroscience 58 10%
Nursing and Health Professions 39 7%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 21 4%
Other 77 13%
Unknown 168 29%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 32. 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 08 May 2023.
All research outputs
#1,100,250
of 23,717,467 outputs
Outputs from BMC Geriatrics
#174
of 3,227 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#15,886
of 268,917 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Geriatrics
#2
of 33 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,717,467 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,227 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.9. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% 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 268,917 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 94% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 33 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its contemporaries.