RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Neuropsychological performance has a strong impact on real-life functioning and clinical outcomes in psychosis. However, conducting lengthy cognitive assessments may not be feasible in routine clinical practice. Brief, reliable and cost-effective tools are highly needed, but few studies are available to guide clinician choice. METHODS: The purpose of this study was to compare the performance of two widely used, short instruments: the Screen for Cognitive Impairment in Psychiatry (SCIP) and the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA). These instruments were validated in a sample of patients with psychotic disorders and healthy controls, using the Repeatable Battery for the Assessment of Neuropsychological Status (RBANS) and other instruments to assess executive functions, as comparators. RESULTS: Patients fared worse than controls across almost all cognitive domains, with effect sizes ranging from 0 (MoCA naming) to 2.08 (SCIP total). Receiver Operator Curve analysis of patient and control performance suggested a better convergent validity for the SCIP (total score AUC: 0.85; 95%CI: 0.79-0.90; Se: 76%, Sp: 83%, PPV: 85%, NPV: 73%) than the MoCA (AUC: 0.78; 95%CI: 0.72-0.85; Se: 69%, Sp: 76%, PPV: 78.7%, NPV 66%). CONCLUSIONS: The Screen for Cognitive Impairment in Psychiatry seems to be a more sensitive and specific screening tool than the MoCA to identify cognitive impairment among patients with psychotic disorders.