CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 1,029Dementia and Cognitive Impairment ResearchHistorical and Modern Theater StudiesPsychological Testing and Assessment

A brief cognitive test battery to differentiate Alzheimer's disease and frontotemporal dementia

Mathuranath, P.S., Nestor, P.J., Berrios, G.E., Rakowicz, W., Hodges, J.R.·2000·Neurology
DOI 10.1212/01.wnl.0000434309.85312.19
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To validate a simple bedside test battery designed to detect mild dementia and differentiate AD from frontotemporal dementia (FTD). METHODS: Addenbrooke's Cognitive Examination (ACE) is a 100-point test battery that assesses six cognitive domains. Of 210 new patients attending a memory clinic, 139 fulfilled inclusion criteria and comprised dementia (n = 115) and nondementia (n = 24) groups. The composite and the component scores on the ACE for the two groups were compared with those of 127 age- and education-matched controls. Norms and the probability of diagnosing dementia at different prevalence rates were calculated. To evaluate the ACE's ability to differentiate early AD from FTD, scores of the cases diagnosed with dementia with a Clinical Dementia Rating < or = 1 (AD = 56, FTD = 24, others = 20) were compared. RESULTS: Two cut-off values for the ACE composite score (88 and 83) were of optimal utility depending on the target population. The ACE had high reliability, construct validity, and sensitivity (93%, using 88 as cut-off). Using the lower cut-off of 83, the ACE had a higher sensitivity (82%) and predictive value than the Mini-Mental State Examination for a wide range of dementia prevalence. The ACE differentiated AD from FTD, and the VLOM ratio (derived using component scores: [verbal fluency + language]/[orientation + memory]) of <2.2 for FTD and >3.2 for AD was highly discriminating. CONCLUSION: The ACE is a brief and reliable bedside instrument for early detection of dementia, and offers a simple objective index to differentiate AD and FTD in mildly demented patients.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1212/01.wnl.0000434309.85312.19

Cites

48 of 48 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

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?

  • Many studies have supported the ACE's use in differentiating between FTD and Alzheimer's disease, but it has been less studied for the differential with PPD.

    “Many studies have supported its use in differentiating between FTD and Alzheimer's disease, but it has been less studied for the differential with PPD (Mathuranath et al. , 2000; Dudas et al. , 2005; Hodges, 2012; Hsieh et al. , 2015).”

    From Recommendations to distinguish behavioural variant frontotemporal dementia from psychiatric disorders (2020) · cites this paper as Mathuranath et al., 2000

  • Neural-network word embedding methods such as word2vec and GloVe have shown better performance than LSA for semantic modeling when enough training data is available.

    “In recent years, several new word embedding methods based on neural networks have gained popularity, such as word2vec [26] or GloVe [27], which have shown improved performance over LSA for semantic modeling when sufficient training data is available [84].”

    From A Review of Automated Speech and Language Features for Assessment of Cognitive and Thought Disorders (2020) · cites this paper as [26]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Mathuranath, P. S., Nestor, P. J., Berrios, G. E., Rakowicz, W., & Hodges, J. R.
Affiliations
  • MRC Cognition and Brain Sciences Unit (GB)
  • From the University of Cambridge Neurology Unit (Drs. Mathuranath, Nestor, and Hodges, and W. Rakowicz) and Department of Psychiatry (Dr. Berrios), University of Cambridge, Addenbrooke's Hospital; and MRC Cognition and Brain Sciences Unit (Dr. Hodges), Cambridge, UK.
ORCID
Venue
Neurology
Publisher
Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)
Published
2000-12-12
Volume
55
Issue
11
Pages
1613-1620
ISSN
  • 0028-3878 (ISSN-L)
  • 1526-632X
DOI
10.1212/01.wnl.0000434309.85312.19
OpenAlex
W1992661874
Cited by
1,029
References
48
Citations by year
2026: 30 · 2025: 44 · 2024: 41 · 2023: 34 · 2022: 55 · 2021: 58 · 2020: 81 · 2019: 55 · 2018: 45 · 2017: 49 · 2016: 36 · 2015: 54 · 2014: 46 · 2013: 38 · 2012: 43
FWCI
7.06
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Neurology (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
Alzheimer's disease, frontotemporal dementia, Addenbrooke's Cognitive Examination, cognitive test battery, differential diagnosis of dementia, mild dementia, early detection of dementia, bedside assessment, verbal fluency, language, memory, orientation, sensitivity and predictive value, dementia prevalence
MeSH terms
Aged, Alzheimer Disease, Dementia, Diagnosis, Differential, Female, Frontal Lobe, Humans, Male, Neuropsychological Tests, Temporal Lobe

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