Diagnostic accuracy and predictive validity of combined use of Fototest and Mini-Cog in cognitive impairment.

INTRODUCTION: The Fototest and Mini-Cog include all the domains that are necessary in a cognitive assessment. This study aims to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of the combined use of both instruments for detecting cognitive impairment. METHODS: We performed a phase III diagnostic accuracy study with 2 independent samples: STUDY, which included 448 participants randomly allocated to 2 datasets (BASE [80%] and TEST [20%]); and EXTERNAL, which included 61 participants. The index test was consecutive administration of the Fototest and Mini-Cog, and the reference test was formal cognitive assessment. We evaluated the diagnostic accuracy of two-step vs consecutive application of the tests and simple (Comb-Simple), logistic regression (Comb-LR), and random decision tree (Comb-RDT) models of their combined use for detecting cognitive impairment (Global Deterioration Scale score ≥ 3). We performed an exploratory analysis of the BASE dataset, selecting criteria that maximise accuracy; a pre-specified analysis was used to evaluate the selected criteria in the TEST and EXTERNAL datasets. RESULTS: The diagnostic accuracy (95% confidence interval) of the combined models in the BASE dataset (Comb-Simple: 88.3 [88.5-91.4]; Comb-LR: 91.6 [88.2-94.3]; Comb-RDT 95.2 [92.5-97.2]) was significantly higher than the individual values observed for the Mini-Cog and Fototest (81.6 [77.1-85.4] and 84.9 [80.8-88.5], respectively). These results were replicated in the TEST (Comb-Simple: 88.9; Comb-LR: 95.6; Comb-RDT: 92.2) and EXTERNAL datasets (Comb-Simple: 91.8; Comb-LR: 90.2; Comb-RDT: 88.5). Two-step application had the same diagnostic accuracy than consecutive application but required less time (mean [SD] of 197.3 s [56.7] vs 233.9 s [45.2]; P < .0001). CONCLUSIONS: Combined application of the Fototest and Mini-Cog takes less than 4 minutes and improves the diagnostic accuracy of both instruments. Two-step application is more efficient as it requires less time while maintaining the same diagnostic accuracy.

Normative data for the Fototest from neurological patients with no cognitive impairment.

OBJECTIVES: To contribute normative data for the Fototest from neurological patients with no cognitive impairment, including disaggregated data on each domain of the test (naming, free recall, total recall, and naming fluency). MATERIAL AND METHODS: We performed a cross-sectional study in which neurological patients with no cognitive impairment were tested with the Fototest; we recorded total and domain scores. We performed a descriptive study of the total and domain scores, with data disaggregated by sex, age (over/under 65 years), and level of education (primary education completed/not completed; further study completed). RESULTS: We included a sample of 1055 patients, who were mainly women (57.1%), aged over 65 (60.6%), and had a low level of education (38.6% had not completed primary education). Sex, age, and level of education influence total Fototest score (34.6 ±â€¯5.3; P10: 28; P5: 27) and free recall (8.5 ±â€¯2.2; 6; 4), total recall (10.0 ±â€¯1.5; 8; 7), and naming fluency scores (18.7 ±â€¯4.9; 13; 12). For total score, the multivariate analysis revealed values of 1.5 ±â€¯0.3 (ß ±â€¯SD) for sex (female), -2.4 ±â€¯0.3 for age (>65), and -1.6 ±â€¯0.4 and 3.3 ±â€¯0.4 for incomplete primary education and completed post-primary education, respectively (completed primary study was used as a reference). CONCLUSIONS: We provide normative data for total and domain Fototest results for each of the groups defined according to sex, age, and level of education. We also provide a percentile distribution of scores. We hope that these normative data will translate into increases in efficiency in Fototest administration in the clinical setting.

Assessment of the diagnostic accuracy and discriminative validity of the Clock Drawing and Mini-Cog tests in detecting cognitive impairment.

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES: The Mini-Cog is a very brief, widely used cognitive test that includes a memory task and a simplified assessment of the Clock Drawing Test (CDT). There is not a formal evaluation of the Mini-Cog test in Spanish. This study aims to analyse the diagnostic usefulness of the Mini-Cog and CDT for detecting cognitive impairment (CI). METHODS: We performed a cross-sectional study, systematically including all patients who consulted at our neurology clinic over a 6-month period. We assessed diagnostic usefulness for detecting CI (defined according to the National Institute on Aging-Alzheimer's Association criteria for mild cognitive impairment and dementia) according to the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC). Sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative likelihood ratios were calculated for each cut-off point. RESULTS: The study included 581 individuals (315 with CI); 55.1% were women and 27.7% had not completed primary studies. The Mini-Cog showed greater diagnostic usefulness than the CDT (AUC ±â€¯sensitivity: 0.88 ±â€¯0.01 vs 0.84 ±â€¯0.01; P < .01). Both instruments were less useful for screening in individuals with a low education level (0.74 ±â€¯0.05 vs 0.75 ±â€¯0.05, respectively). A cut-off point of 2/3 in the Mini-Cog achieved a sensitivity of 0.90 (95% CI, 0.87-0.93) and a specificity of 0.71 (95% CI, 0.65-0.76); a cut-off point of 5/6 in the CDT achieved a sensitivity of 0.77 (95% CI, 0.72-0.81) and a specificity of 0.80 (95% CI, 0.75-0.85). CONCLUSION: In our neurology clinic, the Mini-Cog showed acceptable diagnostic usefulness for detecting CI, greater than that of the CDT; neither test is an appropriate instrument for individuals with a low level of education.

Diagnostic accuracy and predictive validity of associated use of Fototest and Mini-Cog in cognitive impairment. / Utilidad diagnóstica y validez predictiva del uso conjunto de Fototest y Mini-Cog en deterioro cognitivo.

INTRODUCTION: The Fototest and Mini-Cog include all the domains that are necessary in a cognitive assessment. This study aims to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of the combined use of both instruments for detecting cognitive impairment. METHODS: We performed a phase iii diagnostic accuracy study with 2 independent samples: STUDY, which included 448 participants randomly allocated to 2 datasets (BASE [80%] and TEST [20%]); and EXTERNAL, which included 61 participants. The index test was consecutive administration of the Fototest and Mini-Cog, and the reference test was formal cognitive assessment. We evaluated the diagnostic accuracy of two-step vs. consecutive application of the tests and simple (Comb-Simple), logistic regression (Comb-LR), and random decision tree (Comb-RDT) models of their combined use for detecting cognitive impairment (Global Deterioration Scale score ≥ 3). We performed an exploratory analysis of the BASE dataset, selecting criteria that maximise accuracy; a pre-specified analysis was used to evaluate the selected criteria in the TEST and EXTERNAL datasets. RESULTS: The diagnostic accuracy (95% confidence interval) of the combined models in the BASE dataset (Comb-Simple: 88.3 [88.5-91.4]; Comb-LR: 91.6 [88.2-94.3]; Comb-RDT 95.2 [92.5-97.2]) was significantly higher than the individual values observed for the Mini-Cog and Fototest (81.6 [77.1-85.4] and 84.9 [80.8-88.5], respectively). These results were replicated in the TEST (Comb-Simple: 88.9; Comb-LR: 95.6; Comb-RDT: 92.2) and EXTERNAL datasets (Comb-Simple: 91.8; Comb-LR: 90.2; Comb-RDT: 88.5). Two-step application had the same diagnostic accuracy than consecutive application but required less time (mean [SD] of 197.3 s [56.7] vs. 233.9 s [45.2]; P<.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Combined application of the Fototest and Mini-Cog takes less than 4minutes and improves the diagnostic accuracy of both instruments. Two-step application is more efficient as it requires less time while maintaining the same diagnostic accuracy.

Assessment of the diagnostic accuracy and discriminative validity of the Clock Drawing and Mini-Cog tests in detecting cognitive impairment. / Evaluación de la utilidad diagnóstica y validez discriminativa del Test del Reloj y del Mini-Cog en la detección del deterioro cognitivo.

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES: The Mini-Cog is a very brief, widely used cognitive test that includes a memory task and a simplified assessment of the Clock Drawing Test (CDT). There is not a formal evaluation of the Mini-Cog test in Spanish. This study aims to analyse the diagnostic usefulness of the Mini-Cog and CDT for detecting cognitive impairment (CI). METHODS: We performed a cross-sectional study, systematically including all patients who consulted at our neurology clinic over a 6-month period. We assessed diagnostic usefulness for detecting CI (defined according to the National Institute on Aging-Alzheimer's Association criteria for mild cognitive impairment and dementia) according to the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC). Sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative likelihood ratios were calculated for each cut-off point. RESULTS: The study included 581 individuals (315 with CI); 55.1% were women and 27.7% had not completed primary studies. The Mini-Cog showed greater diagnostic usefulness than the CDT (AUC±sensitivity: 0.88±0.01 vs 0.84±0.01; P<.01). Both instruments were less useful for screening in individuals with a low education level (0.74±0.05 vs 0.75±0.05, respectively). A cut-off point of 2/3 in the Mini-Cog achieved a sensitivity of 0.90 (95%CI, 0.87-0.93) and a specificity of 0.71 (95%CI, 0.65-0.76); a cut-off point of 5/6 in the CDT achieved a sensitivity of 0.77 (95%CI, 0.72-0.81) and a specificity of 0.80 (95%CI, 0.75-0.85). CONCLUSION: In our neurology clinic, the Mini-Cog showed acceptable diagnostic usefulness for detecting CI, greater than that of the CDT; neither test is an appropriate instrument for individuals with a low level of education.

Normative data for the Fototest from neurological patients with no cognitive impairment. / Valores normativos del Fototest en pacientes neurológicos sin deterioro cognitivo.

OBJECTIVES: To contribute normative data for the Fototest from neurological patients with no cognitive impairment, including disaggregated data on each domain of the test (naming, free recall, total recall, and naming fluency). MATERIAL AND METHODS: We performed a cross-sectional study in which neurological patients with no cognitive impairment were tested with the Fototest; we recorded total and domain scores. We performed a descriptive study of the total and domain scores, with data disaggregated by sex, age (over/under 65 years), and level of education (primary education completed/not completed; further study completed). RESULTS: We included a sample of 1,055 patients, who were mainly women (57.1%), aged over 65 (60.6%), and had a low level of education (38.6% had not completed primary education). Sex, age, and level of education influence total Fototest score (34.6 ± 5.3; P10: 28; P5: 27) and naming (5,9±0,3; 6; 5), free recall (8.5 ± 2.2; 6; 4), total recall (10.0 ± 1.5; 8; 7), and naming fluency scores (18.7 ± 4.9; 13; 12). For total score, the multivariate analysis revealed values of 1.5 ± 0.3 (ß ± SE) for sex (female), -2.4 ± 0.3 for age (> 65), and -1.6 ± 0.4 and 3.3 ± 0.4 for incomplete primary education and completed post-primary education, respectively (completed primary study was used as a reference). CONCLUSION: We provide normative data for total and domain Fototest results for each of the groups defined according to sex, age, and level of education. We also provide a percentile distribution of scores. We hope that these normative data will translate into increases in efficiency in Fototest administration in the clinical setting.

Validation of the Spanish-language version of the Relevant Outcome Scale for Alzheimer's Disease. / Estudio ROSA: validación de la versión española de la Relevant Outcome Scale for Alzheimer's Disease.

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES: The Relevant Outcome Scale for Alzheimer's Disease (ROSA) is a useful tool for evaluating and monitoring dementia patients. This study aims to evaluate the validity and reliability of the Spanish version of ROSA. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Spanish multicentre study involving 39 researchers and including 237 patients with Alzheimer disease (78 mild, 79 moderate, and 80 severe). The patients were tested with the following: Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE), Fototest, Neuropsychiatric Inventory (NPI), Blessed dementia scale, and a Spanish-language version of ROSA. A subsample of 40 subjects was retested in the 14 days following the initial evaluation. The construct validity was evaluated with the Spearman correlation coefficient (r), internal consistency with Cronbach's alpha (alpha), and test-retest reliability with the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). RESULTS: ROSA requires 13.8±7.4minutes to administer and its results show a significant association with the clinical stage of AD (mild, 116.7±23.1; moderate, 92.9±19.8; and severe, 64.3±22.6), and with results on the MMSE (r=0.68), Fototest (r=0.63), NPI (r=0.53), and Blessed dementia scale (r=-0.80). ROSA shows high internal consistency (alpha=0.90) and excellent test-retest reliability (ICC0.97). CONCLUSION: The Spanish version of ROSA is a brief, valid, and reliable tool permitting overall evaluation of patients with dementia.

Assessing the diagnostic accuracy (DA) of the Spanish version of the informant-based AD8 questionnaire.

INTRODUCTION: The AD8 is a brief informant-based questionnaire that may also be self-administered, and which aids in identifying cognitive impairment (CI). Our goal is to assess the diagnostic accuracy (DA) of a Spanish version of that questionnaire. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Cross-sectional study of a clinical sample of patient/informant dyads including 330 subjects with suspected CI or dementia (DEM) and 71 controls. We evaluated internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha) and validity (partial correlations with GDS stage, Fototest results and functional index measure [FIM]). We assessed DA for CI vs no CI (GDS stage 3-4) using the area under the ROC curve (AUC), and the cut-off with the highest Youden index was determined to be optimal. RESULTS: In the sample, 105 subjects had no CI, 99 had CI without DEM and 203 had DEM. Internal consistency was high (α 0.90, 95% confidence interval: 0.89-0.92), as were correlations with the GDS score (r=0.72, P<.001), Fototest results (r=-0.61, P<.001) and FIM (r=0.59, P<.001). The AUC for AD8 was 0.90 (95% confidence interval: 0.86-0.93), which was not significantly different from that of the Fototest (AUC 0.93, 95% confidence interval: 0.89-0.96). The optimal cut-off point was 3/4 with a sensitivity of 0.93 (95% confidence interval: 0.88-0.96) and a specificity of 0.81 (95% confidence interval: 0.72-0.88); 88.8% of the classifications were correct. Combined use of AD8 and the Fototest significantly improved the DA of both (AUC 0.96, 95% confidence interval: 0.93-0.98, P<.05). CONCLUSIONS: The Spanish version of the AD8 questionnaire preserves the psychometric qualities and DA of the original. Using this test in combination with the Fototest significantly increases the DA of both tests.