Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 305

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 116 of the 116 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Does This Patient Have Dementia?

Holsinger, Tracey, Deveau, Janie, Boustani, Malaz, Williams, John W.·2007·JAMA

Abstract

CONTEXT: While as many as 5 million individuals in the United States have dementia, many others have memory complaints. Brief tests to screen for cognitive impairment could help guide dementia diagnosis. OBJECTIVE: To review the literature concerning the practicality and accuracy of brief cognitive screening instruments in primary care. DATA SOURCES: A search of MEDLINE (including data from AIDSLINE, BioethicsLine, and HealthSTAR) and psycINFO was conducted from January 2000 through April 2006 to update previous reviews. STUDY SELECTION: Studies of patients aged 60 years and older and use of an acceptable criterion standard to diagnose dementia were considered. DATA EXTRACTION: Studies were assessed by 2 independent reviewers for eligibility and quality. A third independent reviewer adjudicated disagreements. Data for likelihood ratios (LRs) were extracted. DATA SYNTHESIS: Twenty-nine studies using 25 different screening instruments met inclusion criteria; some studies evaluated several different instruments, thus, information could be examined for 38 unique instrument/study combinations. RESULTS: For the commonly used Mini-Mental State Examination, the median LR for a positive result was 6.3 (95% confidence interval [CI], 3.4-47.0) and the median LR for a negative result was 0.19 (95%CI, 0.06-0.37). Briefer approaches are available but have not been studied as frequently. Reports from an informant that the patient has memory loss yields an LR of 6.5 (95% CI, 4.4-9.6) for dementia. The Memory Impairment Screen takes 4 minutes to ask 4 items and has an LR for a positive result of 33 (95% CI, 15.0-72.0) and an LR for a negative result is 0.08 (95% CI, 0.02-0.3). Clock drawings are helpful in 1- to 3-minute forms, but must be scored appropriately and sensitivity to mild forms of impairment can be low. CONCLUSIONS: Clinicians should select 1 primary tool based on (1) the population receiving care; (2) an awareness of the effects of educational level, race, and age on scoring; and (3) consideration of adding 1 or 2 other tools for special situations as needed.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1001/jama.297.21.2391

Cites

116 of 116 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 116 references

Cited by

See all 305

Metadata

Authors
Holsinger, T., Deveau, J., Boustani, M., & Williams, J. W.
Venue
JAMA
Published
2007-06-06
Volume
297
Issue
21
Pages
2391
ISSN
  • 0002-9955 (ISSN-L)
  • 0098-7484
OpenAlex
W2059697135
Cited by
305
References
116
FWCI
9.65
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Does This Patient Have Dementia? https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1001/jama.297.21.2391
The paper
Holsinger, T., Deveau, J., Boustani, M., & Williams, J. W. (2007). Does This Patient Have Dementia? JAMA. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.297.21.2391

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.