Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 835

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

Classification criteria for mild cognitive impairment: A population-based validation study

Open access
Ritchie, Karen, Artero, Sylvaine, Touchon, Jacques·2001·Neurology

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the predictive validity and temporal stability of diagnostic criteria for mild cognitive impairment (MCI). BACKGROUND: MCI has been proposed as a nosologic entity referring to elderly persons with subclinical cognitive deficits due to incipient dementia. Classification criteria, which have been derived from small, selected clinical groups, are currently disputed, and have not yet been assessed within the general population. METHODS: Subjects meeting current criteria for MCI and also age-associated cognitive decline (AACD-a similar concept that is assumed to be related to normal cognitive aging processes rather than incipient dementia) were identified within each of three waves of a longitudinal population study, which included a standardized neurologic examination. RESULTS: In the general population, the prevalence of MCI was estimated to be 3.2% and AACD 19.3%. MCI was a poor predictor of dementia within a 3-year period, with an 11.1% conversion rate. Subjects with MCI also constituted an unstable group, with almost all subjects changing category each year. Discriminant function analysis failed to isolate a homogeneous clinical group. Subjects classified as AACD, contrary to the theoretical assumptions underlying the disorder, represented a more stable group, with a 28.6% conversion rate to dementia over 3 years (relative risk = 21.2). CONCLUSION: MCI criteria perform poorly when applied to a representative population sample. The authors propose modifications to current diagnostic criteria to increase their capacity to detect incipient dementia.

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 · 10.1212/wnl.56.1.37

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 835

Metadata

Authors
Ritchie, K., Artero, S., & Touchon, J.
Venue
Neurology
Published
2001-01-09
Volume
56
Issue
1
Pages
37-42
ISSN
  • 0028-3878 (ISSN-L)
  • 1526-632X
OpenAlex
W2051274997
Cited by
835
References
3
FWCI
24.93
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

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: Classification criteria for mild cognitive impairment: A population-based validation study. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1212/wnl.56.1.37
The paper
Ritchie, K., Artero, S., & Touchon, J. (2001). Classification criteria for mild cognitive impairment: A population-based validation study. Neurology. https://doi.org/10.1212/wnl.56.1.37

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.