CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 291Dementia and Cognitive Impairment ResearchHistorical and Modern Theater StudiesPsychological Testing and Assessment

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 24 of the 25 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA)-Italian version: regression based norms and equivalent scores

Conti, Silvia, Bonazzi, Stefano, Laiacona, Marcella, Masina, Marco, Coralli, Mirco Vanelli·2015·Neurological Sciences
DOI 10.1007/s10072-014-1921-3
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

The Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) is a brief cognitive screening instrument developed by Nasreddine et al. to detect mild cognitive impairment, a high-risk condition for Alzheimer's disease and other forms of dementia. In this study we report normative data on the MoCA-Italian version, collected on a sample of 225 Italian healthy subjects ranged in age between 60 and 80 years, and in formal education from 5 to 23 years. The global normal cognition was established in accordance with the Mini-Mental State Examination score and with the Prose Memory Test score (Spinnler and Tognoni, Ital J Neurol Sci 6:25-27, 1987). None of the participants had a history of psychiatric, neurological, cerebrovascular disorders or brain injury or took drugs affecting cognition. Linear regression analysis was performed to evaluate the potential effect of age, education and sex on the MoCA total performance score. We provide correction grids to adjust raw scores and equivalent scores with cut-off value to allow comparison between MoCA performance and others neuropsychological test scores that can be administered on the same subject.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s10072-014-1921-3

Cites

24 of 24 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Citations

Cites

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. Spinnler H, Tognoni G (1987) Standardizzazione e Taratura Italiana di Test Neuropsicolgici. Ital J Neurol Sci 6:25–27
  2. Capitani E, Laiacona M (2000) Classification and modelling in neuropsychology: from groups to single cases. In: Boller F, Grafman J, Rizzolatti G (eds) Handbook of neuropsychology, 2nd edn, vol 1, pp 53–76

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 291

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Conti, S., Bonazzi, S., Laiacona, M., Masina, M., & Coralli, M. V.
Affiliations
  • University of Padua (IT)
  • Azienda USL di Bologna (IT)
  • Istituti Clinici Scientifici Maugeri (IT)
Corresponding author
Conti, Silvia
ORCID
Venue
Neurological Sciences
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Published
2014-08-20
Volume
36
Issue
2
Pages
209-214
ISSN
  • 1590-1874 (ISSN-L)
  • 1590-3478
DOI
10.1007/s10072-014-1921-3
OpenAlex
W1983421775
Cited by
291
References
25
Citations by year
2026: 29 · 2025: 46 · 2024: 34 · 2023: 40 · 2022: 30 · 2021: 38 · 2020: 14 · 2019: 21 · 2018: 12 · 2017: 11 · 2016: 10 · 2015: 4 · 2014: 1
FWCI
6.62
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
www.springer.com/tdm (tdm)
Locations
  • Neurological Sciences (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Dementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Historical and Modern Theater Studies
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Psychological Testing and Assessment
Keywords
Montreal Cognitive Assessment, Italian adaptation, reference values, cognitive screening, mild cognitive impairment, dementia, Alzheimer's disease, healthy older adults
MeSH terms
Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Cognition Disorders, Female, Humans, Italy, Language, Male, Middle Aged, Psychiatric Status Rating Scales, Reference Values, Linear Models

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