Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 480

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Underestimation of Cognitive Impairment by Mini-Mental State Examination Versus the Montreal Cognitive Assessment in Patients With Transient Ischemic Attack and Stroke: A Population-Based Study

Pendlebury, Sarah T., Cuthbertson, Fiona C., Welch, Sarah J.V., Mehta, Ziyah, Rothwell, Peter M.·2010·Stroke

Abstract

Background and Purpose— The Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) is insensitive to mild cognitive impairment and executive function. The more recently developed Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA), an alternative, brief 30-point global cognitive screen, might pick up more cognitive abnormalities in patients with cerebrovascular disease. Methods— In a population-based study (Oxford Vascular Study) of transient ischemic attack and stroke, the MMSE and MoCA were administered to consecutive patients at 6-month or 5-year follow-up. Accepted cutoffs of MMSE <27 and MoCA <26 were taken to indicate cognitive impairment. Results— Of 493 patients, 413 (84%) were testable. Untestable patients were older (75.5 versus 69.9 years, P <0.001) and often had dysphasia (24%) or dementia (15%). Although MMSE and MoCA scores were highly correlated ( r 2 =0.80, P <0.001), MMSE scores were skewed toward higher values, whereas MoCA scores were normally distributed: median and interquartile range 28 (26 to 29) and 23 (20 to 26), respectively. Two hundred ninety-one of 413 (70%) patients had MoCA <26 of whom 162 had MMSE ≥27, whereas only 5 patients had MoCA ≥26 and MMSE <27 ( P <0.0001). In patients with MMSE ≥27, MoCA <26 was associated with higher Rankin scores ( P =0.0003) and deficits in delayed recall, abstraction, visuospatial/executive function, and sustained attention. Conclusion— The MoCA picked up substantially more cognitive abnormalities after transient ischemic attack and stroke than the MMSE, demonstrating deficits in executive function, attention, and delayed recall.

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 · 10.1161/strokeaha.110.579888

Cites

3 of 3 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 3 references

Cited by

See all 480

Metadata

Authors
Pendlebury, S. T., Cuthbertson, F. C., Welch, S. J. V., Mehta, Z., & Rothwell, P. M.
Venue
Stroke
Published
2010-06
Volume
41
Issue
6
Pages
1290-1293
ISSN
  • 0039-2499 (ISSN-L)
  • 1524-4628
OpenAlex
W2042818316
Cited by
480
References
3
FWCI
21.33
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: Underestimation of Cognitive Impairment by Mini-Mental State Examination Versus the Montreal Cognitive Assessment in Patients With Transient Ischemic Attack and Stroke: A Population-Based Study. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1161/strokeaha.110.579888
The paper
Pendlebury, S. T., Cuthbertson, F. C., Welch, S. J. V., Mehta, Z., & Rothwell, P. M. (2010). Underestimation of Cognitive Impairment by Mini-Mental State Examination Versus the Montreal Cognitive Assessment in Patients With Transient Ischemic Attack and Stroke: A Population-Based Study. Stroke. https://doi.org/10.1161/strokeaha.110.579888

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.