View in EDS

Three sides of the same coin: measuring global cognitive impairment with the MMSE, ADAS-cog and CAMCOG.

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Title: Three sides of the same coin: measuring global cognitive impairment with the MMSE, ADAS-cog and CAMCOG.
Authors: Wouters H (AUTHOR), van Gool WA (AUTHOR), Schmand B (AUTHOR), Zwinderman AH (AUTHOR), Lindeboom R (AUTHOR)
Source: International Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry. Aug2010, Vol. 25 Issue 8, p770-779. 10p.
Abstract: OBJECTIVE: The total scores of the ADAS-cog, MMSE and CAMCOG, comprising various cognitive tasks, are widely used to measure a dimension of global cognitive impairment. It is unknown, however, whether this dimension is common to these instruments. This hampers comparisons when either of these instruments is used. The extent to which these instruments share a common dimension of global cognitive impairment and how their scores relate was examined. METHODS: Rasch analysis of CAMCOG and MMSE data of participants from a population based study and two memory clinics pooled with ADAS-cog and MMSE data of participants from three RCTs (overall N = 1566) to estimate a common dimension of global cognitive impairment and to examine the goodness of fit of the individual items to this dimension. RESULTS: Using the estimated common dimension of global cognitive impairment, the total scores of the instruments could be related, e.g. a mean level of global cognitive impairment corresponded to a predicted score of 11.4 (ADAS-cog), 72.6 (CAMCOG) and 22.2 (MMSE). When revised according to The Rasch validity analyses, every individual item could be fitted to the dimension. CONCLUSIONS: The MMSE, ADAS-cog and CAMCOG reflect a valid common dimension of global cognitive impairment, which enables comparisons of RCTs that use the ADAS-cog and observational studies that use the CAMCOG and MMSE. Copyright (c) 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
Copyright of International Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)
Database: Psychology and Behavioral Sciences Collection
Description
Abstract:OBJECTIVE: The total scores of the ADAS-cog, MMSE and CAMCOG, comprising various cognitive tasks, are widely used to measure a dimension of global cognitive impairment. It is unknown, however, whether this dimension is common to these instruments. This hampers comparisons when either of these instruments is used. The extent to which these instruments share a common dimension of global cognitive impairment and how their scores relate was examined. METHODS: Rasch analysis of CAMCOG and MMSE data of participants from a population based study and two memory clinics pooled with ADAS-cog and MMSE data of participants from three RCTs (overall N = 1566) to estimate a common dimension of global cognitive impairment and to examine the goodness of fit of the individual items to this dimension. RESULTS: Using the estimated common dimension of global cognitive impairment, the total scores of the instruments could be related, e.g. a mean level of global cognitive impairment corresponded to a predicted score of 11.4 (ADAS-cog), 72.6 (CAMCOG) and 22.2 (MMSE). When revised according to The Rasch validity analyses, every individual item could be fitted to the dimension. CONCLUSIONS: The MMSE, ADAS-cog and CAMCOG reflect a valid common dimension of global cognitive impairment, which enables comparisons of RCTs that use the ADAS-cog and observational studies that use the CAMCOG and MMSE. Copyright (c) 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
ISSN:08856230
DOI:10.1002/gps.2402