The DOI matches its Crossref record; 18 of the 18 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Simplifying Detection of Cognitive Impairment: Comparison of the Mini‐Cog and Mini‐Mental State Examination in a Multiethnic Sample
Abstract
Objectives: To compare detection of cognitive impairment using the Mini‐Cog and Mini‐Mental State Examination (MMSE) and to identify sociodemographic variables that influence detection in an ethnoculturally diverse sample. Design: Cross‐sectional. Setting: A registry of the University of Washington Alzheimer's Disease Research Center Satellite. Participants: A heterogeneous community sample (n=371) of predominantly ethnic minority elderly assessed using a standardized research protocol, 231 of whom met criteria for dementia or mild cognitive impairment (MCI). Measurements: Demographic data, a standardized research protocol for cognitive assessment and dementia diagnosis, MMSE, and Mini‐Cog. Results: Both screens effectively detected cognitive impairment, the Mini‐Cog slightly better than the MMSE ( P< .01). Overall accuracy of classification was 83% for the Mini‐Cog and 81% for the MMSE. The Mini‐Cog was superior in recognizing patients with Alzheimer‐type dementias ( P= .05). Low education negatively affected detection using the MMSE ( P< .001), whereas education did not affect the Mini‐Cog, and low literacy minimally affected it. Conclusion: The Mini‐Cog detects clinically significant cognitive impairment as well as or better than the MMSE in multiethnic elderly individuals, is easier to administer to non‐English speakers, and is less biased by low education and literacy.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
McKhann, G., Drachman, D., Folstein, M., Katzman, R., Price, D., & Stadlan, E. M. (1984) · Neurology · doi:10.1212/wnl.34.7.939 · Cited by 27,915
A New Clinical Scale for the Staging of Dementia
Hughes, C. P., Berg, L., Danziger, W., Coben, L. A., & Martin, R. L. (1982) · British Journal of Psychiatry · doi:10.1192/bjp.140.6.566 · Cited by 7,056
Moms, J. C., Heyman, A., Mohs, R. C., Hughes, J. P., van Belle, G., Fillenbaum, G., Mellits, E. D., & Clark, C. (1989) · Neurology · doi:10.1212/wnl.39.9.1159 · Cited by 4,130
Population-Based Norms for the Mini-Mental State Examination by Age and Educational Level
Crum, R. M. (1993) · JAMA: The Journal of the American Medical Association · doi:10.1001/jama.1993.03500180078038 · Cited by 2,929
Clinical and neuropathological criteria for frontotemporal dementia. The Lund and Manchester Groups.
(1994) · Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery & Psychiatry · doi:10.1136/jnnp.57.4.416 · Cited by 1,331
Mungas, D., Marshall, S. C., Weldon, M., Haan, M., & Reed, B. R. (1996) · Neurology · doi:10.1212/wnl.46.3.700 · Cited by 343
ASSESSMENT OF OLDER PEOPLE: SELF-MAINTAINING AND INSTRUMENTAL ACTIVITIES OF DAILY LIVING
LAWTON, M. P., & BRODY, E. M. (1970) · Nursing Research · doi:10.1097/00006199-197005000-00029 · Cited by 336
Jorm, A. F., Scott, R., Cullen, J. S., & MacKinnon, A. J. (1991) · Psychological Medicine · doi:10.1017/s0033291700022418 · Cited by 320
DE JAGER, C. A., HOGERVORST, E., COMBRINCK, M., & BUDGE, M. M. (2003) · Psychological Medicine · doi:10.1017/s0033291703008031 · Cited by 259
Mixed Dementia: Epidemiology, Diagnosis, and Treatment
Zekry, D., Hauw, J., & Gold, G. (2002) · Journal of the American Geriatrics Society · doi:10.1046/j.1532-5415.2002.50367.x · Cited by 243
Cited by
Mohile, S. G., Dale, W., Somerfield, M. R., Schonberg, M. A., Boyd, C. M., Burhenn, P. S., Canin, B., Cohen, H. J., Holmes, H. M., Hopkins, J. O., et al. (2018) · Journal of Clinical Oncology · doi:10.1200/jco.2018.78.8687 · Cited by 1,479
Cognitive Tests to Detect Dementia: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
Tsoi, K. K. F., Chan, J. Y. C., Hirai, H. W., Wong, S. Y. S., & Kwok, T. C. Y. (2015) · JAMA Internal Medicine · doi:10.1001/jamainternmed.2015.2152 · Cited by 887
Creavin, S. T., Wisniewski, S., Noel-Storr, A. H., Trevelyan, C. M., Hampton, T., Rayment, D., Thom, V. M., Nash, K. J. E., Elhamoui, H., Milligan, R., et al. (2016) · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · doi:10.1002/14651858.cd011145.pub2 · Cited by 820
Frailty in Older Adults Undergoing Aortic Valve Replacement
Afilalo, J., Lauck, S., Kim, D. H., Lefèvre, T., Piazza, N., Lachapelle, K., Martucci, G., Lamy, A., Labinaz, M., Peterson, M. D., et al. (2017) · Journal of the American College of Cardiology · doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2017.06.024 · Cited by 818
Cordell, C. B., Borson, S., Boustani, M., Chodosh, J., Reuben, D., Verghese, J., Thies, W., Fried, L. B., & Workgroup, M. D. O. C. I. (2013) · Alzheimer's & Dementia · doi:10.1016/j.jalz.2012.09.011 · Cited by 578
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Borson, S., Scanlan, J. M., Watanabe, J., Tu, S., & Lessig, M.
- Venue
- Journal of the American Geriatrics Society
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2005-05
- Volume
- 53
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 871-874
- ISSN
- 0002-8614 (ISSN-L)
- 1532-5415
- OpenAlex
- W1779899937
- Cited by
- 318
- References
- 18
- FWCI
- 6.97
- 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: Simplifying Detection of Cognitive Impairment: Comparison of the Mini‐Cog and Mini‐Mental State Examination in a Multiethnic Sample. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1532-5415.2005.53269.x
- The paper
- Borson, S., Scanlan, J. M., Watanabe, J., Tu, S., & Lessig, M. (2005). Simplifying Detection of Cognitive Impairment: Comparison of the Mini‐Cog and Mini‐Mental State Examination in a Multiethnic Sample. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1532-5415.2005.53269.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.
