Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 358

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Validation of a Telephone Version of the Mini‐Mental State Examination

Roccaforte, William H., Burke, William J., Bayer, Barbara L., Wengel, Steven P.·1992·Journal of the American Geriatrics Society

Abstract

Objective: To assess the construct validity of a telephone‐administered version of the Mini‐Mental State Examination (MMSE). Design: Validity testing by comparing a telephone version of the MMSE administered first to a face‐to‐face evaluation done several days later. Setting: Outpatient geriatric assessment center. Subjects: 100 of 175 consecutive referrals. Main Outcome Measures: MMSE and a brief neuropsychological screening test (BNPS) face‐to‐face and a telephone version of the MMSE as part of the Adult Lifestyles and Function Interview (ALFI‐MMSE). Results: Test scores of the two MMSE versions correlated strongly for all subjects (Pearson's r = 0.85, P = 0.001) and remained significant for the cognitively intact ( P = 0.02) and questionably ( P = 0.002), mildly ( P = 0.0001), and moderately ( P = 0.003) demented. Comparison of the two versions' equivalent 22 items revealed no significant difference for scores of all subjects ( P = 0.07) but with a trend toward higher scores in the original version. Diminished hearing, reported either by the subject ( P = 0.003) or by the collateral source ( P = 0.02) was associated with lower scores on the telephone version. Five individual test items were biased by the route of test administration. Sensitivity and specificity relative to the BNPS were 67% and 100% for the ALFI‐MMSE and 68% and 100% for the MMSE, respectively. Conclusion: The scores on the ALFI‐MMSE correlated strongly with the scores of the original version given face‐to‐face in subjects undergoing geriatric assessment. The results indicate that the ALFI‐MMSE could be a useful and economical tool to screen for 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 · 10.1111/j.1532-5415.1992.tb01962.x

Cites

2 of 2 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 2 references

Cited by

See all 358

Metadata

Authors
Roccaforte, W. H., Burke, W. J., Bayer, B. L., & Wengel, S. P.
Venue
Journal of the American Geriatrics Society
Publisher
Wiley
Published
1992-07
Volume
40
Issue
7
Pages
697-702
ISSN
  • 0002-8614 (ISSN-L)
  • 1532-5415
OpenAlex
W1987922230
Cited by
358
References
2
FWCI
2.73
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: Validation of a Telephone Version of the Mini‐Mental State Examination. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1532-5415.1992.tb01962.x
The paper
Roccaforte, W. H., Burke, W. J., Bayer, B. L., & Wengel, S. P. (1992). Validation of a Telephone Version of the Mini‐Mental State Examination. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1532-5415.1992.tb01962.x

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.