ArticleBMC geriatrics2024
Determining optimal cutoff scores of Cognitive Abilities Screening Instrument to identify dementia and mild cognitive impairment in Taiwan.
Article in BMC geriatrics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Interactions between minimal amount of exercise and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol on incident dementia after stroke.iScience · 2026Article
- Early presentation of spastic paraparesis in individuals carrying PSEN1 mutations: a clinical and genetic analysis.Alzheimer's research & therapy · 2025Article
- Protocol for the Asian Cohort for Alzheimer's Disease (ACAD) Study.Alzheimer's & dementia (New York, N. Y.)Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe early detection of dementia depends on efficient methods for the assessment of cognitive capacity. Existing cognitive screening tools are ill-suited to the differentiation of cognitive status, particularly when dealing with early-stage impairment.
methodsThe study included 8,979 individuals (> 50 years) with unimpaired cognitive functions, mild cognitive impairment (MCI), or dementia. This study sought to determine optimal cutoffs values for the Cognitive Abilities Screening Instrument (CASI) aimed at differentiating between individuals with or without dementia as well as between individuals with or without mild cognitive impairment. Cox proportional hazards models were used to evaluate the value of CASI tasks in predicting conversion from MCI to all-cause dementia, dementia of Alzheimer's type (DAT), or to vascular dementia (VaD).
resultsOur optimized cutoff scores achieved high accuracy in differentiating between individuals with or without dementia (AUC = 0.87-0.93) and moderate accuracy in differentiating between CU and MCI individuals (AUC = 0.67 - 0.74). Among individuals without cognitive impairment, scores that were at least 1.5 × the standard deviation below the mean scores on CASI memory tasks were predictive of conversion to dementia within roughly 2 years after the first assessment (all-cause dementia: hazard ratio [HR] = 2.81 - 3.53; DAT: 1.28 - 1.49; VaD: 1.58). Note that the cutoff scores derived in this study were lower than those reported in previous studies.
conclusionOur results in this study underline the importance of establishing optimal cutoff scores for individuals with specific demographic characteristics and establishing profiles by which to guide CASI analysis.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.