Variability in Annual Mini-Mental State Examination Score in Patients With Probable Alzheimer Disease: A Clinical Perspective of Data From the Consortium to Establish a Registry for Alzheimer's Disease
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To determine the variability in annual Mini-Mental State Examination scores of patients with Alzheimer disease enrolled in the Consortium to Establish a Registry for Alzheimer's Disease (CERAD). PATIENTS: A total of 372 patients with probable Alzheimer disease with 1 or more years of follow-up. SETTING: Twenty-one CERAD clinical sites throughout the United States. RESULTS: An average annual decline of 3.4 points in CERAD patients returning for longitudinal reassessments was close to the SD of the measurement error of 2.8 points for the Mini-Mental State Examination. There was wide variability in individual rates of decline. Even with 4 years of follow-up, 15.8% of the patients had no clinically meaningful decline in Mini-Mental State Examination score (defined as a change in initial score >3, ie, 1 SD of measurement error). Validity of measurements of the rate of change in Mini-Mental State Examination scores improved with longer observation intervals and was reliable for most patients when observations were separated by 3 or more years. CONCLUSIONS: Although the Mini-Mental State Examination is a useful screening instrument to assess level of cognitive function, it has limited value in measuring the progression of Alzheimer disease in individual patients for periods less than 3 years because of a large measurement error and substantial variation in change in annual score.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The molecular, anatomic, and clinical changes of AD may not progress in a uniform fashion.
“Another challenge of CPC studies is that the molecular, anatomic, and clinical changes of AD may not progress in a uniform fashion (7, 12-15).”
From Correlation of Alzheimer Disease Neuropathologic Changes With Cognitive Status: A Review of the Literature (2012) · cites this paper as [14]
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 34 · Cited by 298
- Authors
- Clark, C. M.
- Affiliations
- University of Pennsylvania (US)
- Corresponding author
- Clark, Christopher M.
- Venue
- Archives of Neurology
- Publisher
- American Medical Association (AMA)
- Published
- 1999-07-01
- Volume
- 56
- Issue
- 7
- Pages
- 857
- ISSN
- 0003-9942 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2141838737
- Cited by
- 298
- References
- 34
- Citations by year
- 2026: 8 · 2025: 12 · 2024: 13 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 16 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 18 · 2019: 16 · 2018: 9 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 11 · 2015: 14 · 2014: 13 · 2013: 8 · 2012: 14
- FWCI
- 6.89
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Archives of Neurology (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- University of Pennsylvania
- National Institute on Aging (AG06790, U01AG006790, P30AG010124, AG-10124)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Dementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Psychological Testing and Assessment
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Historical and Modern Theater Studies
- Keywords
- Alzheimer's disease, Mini-Mental State Examination, cognitive decline, measurement error, interindividual variability, decline rate, longitudinal assessment, observation interval, cognitive screening
- MeSH terms
- Aged, Alzheimer Disease, Cognition Disorders, Female, Follow-Up Studies, Humans, Male, Neuropsychological Tests, Registries, Severity of Illness Index, Cohort Studies
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review