Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 276

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 46 of the 46 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Degree of discrepancy between self and other‐reported everyday functioning by cognitive status: dementia, mild cognitive impairment, and healthy elders

Open access
Farias, Sarah Tomaszewski, Mungas, Dan, Jagust, William·2005·International Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry
DOI 10.1002/gps.1367
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Background: Previous studies show individuals with dementia overestimate their cognitive and functional abilities compared to reports from caregivers. Few studies have examined whether individuals with Mild Cognitive Impairment (MCI) also tend to underestimate their deficits. In this study we examined whether degree of discrepancy between patient and informant‐reported everyday functioning was associated with cognitive status. Methods: The sample consisted of 111 ethnically diverse community‐dwelling older adults (46 Caucasians and 65 Hispanic individuals), which was divided into four diagnostic categories: cognitively normal, MCI‐memory impaired, MCI‐nonmemory impaired, and demented. Everyday functional abilities were measured using both a self‐report and informant‐report version of the Daily Function Questionnaire (DFQ). A Difference Score was calculated by subtracting patients' DFQ score from their informants' score. Results: DFQ Difference Scores were significantly higher in the demented group compared to normals and both of the MCI groups. However, the Difference Scores for the MCI groups were not significantly different than the normals. Further, while patient reported everyday functioning did not differ among the four diagnostic groups, informant reported functional status was significantly different across all diagnostic groups except MCI‐nonmemory impaired vs normals. Performance on objective memory testing was associated with informant‐rated but not patient‐rated functional status. Demographic characteristics of the patients and informants, including ethnicity, had no association with the degree of discrepancy between raters. Conclusions: Although there may be some mild functional changes associated particularly with the MCI‐memory impaired subtype, individuals with MCI do not appear to under‐report their functional status as can often been seen in persons with dementia. Copyright © 2005 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

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 · 10.1002/gps.1367

Cites

46 of 46 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 46 references

Cited by

See all 276

Metadata

Authors
Farias, S. T., Mungas, D., & Jagust, W.
Venue
International Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2005-08-22
Volume
20
Issue
9
Pages
827-834
ISSN
  • 0885-6230 (ISSN-L)
  • 1099-1166
DOI
10.1002/gps.1367
OpenAlex
W2006084264
Cited by
276
References
46
FWCI
3.85
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

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: Degree of discrepancy between self and other‐reported everyday functioning by cognitive status: dementia, mild cognitive impairment, and healthy elders. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/gps.1367
The paper
Farias, S. T., Mungas, D., & Jagust, W. (2005). Degree of discrepancy between self and other‐reported everyday functioning by cognitive status: dementia, mild cognitive impairment, and healthy elders. International Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry. https://doi.org/10.1002/gps.1367

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.