Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 887

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 63 of the 63 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Cognitive Tests to Detect Dementia: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Tsoi, Kelvin K. F., Chan, Joyce Y. C., Hirai, Hoyee W., Wong, Samuel Y. S., Kwok, Timothy C. Y.·2015·JAMA Internal Medicine

Abstract

IMPORTANCE: Dementia is a global public health problem. The Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) is a proprietary instrument for detecting dementia, but many other tests are also available. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the diagnostic performance of all cognitive tests for the detection of dementia. DATA SOURCES: Literature searches were performed on the list of dementia screening tests in MEDLINE, EMBASE, and PsychoINFO from the earliest available dates stated in the individual databases until September 1, 2014. Because Google Scholar searches literature with a combined ranking algorithm on citation counts and keywords in each article, our literature search was extended to Google Scholar with individual test names and dementia screening as a supplementary search. STUDY SELECTION: Studies were eligible if participants were interviewed face to face with respective screening tests, and findings were compared with criterion standard diagnostic criteria for dementia. Bivariate random-effects models were used, and the area under the summary receiver-operating characteristic curve was used to present the overall performance. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative likelihood ratios were the main outcomes. RESULTS: Eleven screening tests were identified among 149 studies with more than 49,000 participants. Most studies used the MMSE (n = 102) and included 10,263 patients with dementia. The combined sensitivity and specificity for detection of dementia were 0.81 (95% CI, 0.78-0.84) and 0.89 (95% CI, 0.87-0.91), respectively. Among the other 10 tests, the Mini-Cog test and Addenbrooke's Cognitive Examination-Revised (ACE-R) had the best diagnostic performances, which were comparable to that of the MMSE (Mini-Cog, 0.91 sensitivity and 0.86 specificity; ACE-R, 0.92 sensitivity and 0.89 specificity). Subgroup analysis revealed that only the Montreal Cognitive Assessment had comparable performance to the MMSE on detection of mild cognitive impairment with 0.89 sensitivity and 0.75 specificity. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Besides the MMSE, there are many other tests with comparable diagnostic performance for detecting dementia. The Mini-Cog test and the ACE-R are the best alternative screening tests for dementia, and the Montreal Cognitive Assessment is the best alternative for mild cognitive impairment.

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/jamainternmed.2015.2152

Cites

63 of 63 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 63 references

Cited by

See all 887

Metadata

Authors
Tsoi, K. K. F., Chan, J. Y. C., Hirai, H. W., Wong, S. Y. S., & Kwok, T. C. Y.
Venue
JAMA Internal Medicine
Published
2015-09-01
Volume
175
Issue
9
Pages
1450
ISSN
2168-6106 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2151989011
Cited by
887
References
63
FWCI
29.67
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: Cognitive Tests to Detect Dementia: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1001/jamainternmed.2015.2152
The paper
Tsoi, K. K. F., Chan, J. Y. C., Hirai, H. W., Wong, S. Y. S., & Kwok, T. C. Y. (2015). Cognitive Tests to Detect Dementia: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. JAMA Internal Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamainternmed.2015.2152

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.