Zhe-Zuo Zhang, Xiao-Ying Lyu, Xiang-Wei Dai, Jian-Ni Cong, Fu-Xia Yang
{"title":"Validity and Reliability of Outcome Measurement Instruments for Cognitive Function in Alzheimer's Disease: A Systematic Review.","authors":"Zhe-Zuo Zhang, Xiao-Ying Lyu, Xiang-Wei Dai, Jian-Ni Cong, Fu-Xia Yang","doi":"10.1159/000545907","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>In this systematic review, we aimed to identify suitable measurement tools for screening individuals for cognitive impairment in Alzheimer's disease (AD). We conducted a comprehensive evaluation of the reliability and validity of cognitive function assessment instruments. We offer insightful suggestions for further research on cognitive function scale development and clinical researchers in AD.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We searched the PUBMED and CNKI databases for studies aimed at developing or evaluating the validity or reliability of cognitive function assessment scales. The methodological quality of the studies was assessed using the consensus-based standards for the selection of health measurement instruments (COSMIN) according to the 'worst score counts' principle. Subsequently, the measurement properties were rated qualitatively. Results were rated using the modified Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation. Recommendations were categorized into four levels: A, B, C, and D.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We retrieved a total of 804 studies. Following screening, a total of 62 articles were included, which reported 49 cognitive impairment assessment scales. The methodological quality of studies ranged from inadequate to very good, and the measurement properties varied from sufficient (+) to indeterminate (?). We found that the ADAS-Cog, MoCA, BPMSE, CDR and the other 28 scales had sufficient validity and reliability.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Our evaluation according to the COSMIN guidelines suggested that the ADAS-Cog, MoCA, BPMSE, CDR and MMSE could be used to assess the degree of cognitive impairment in patients with AD. When developing cognitive function assessment scales, factors such as time and linguistic and cultural differences could be carefully considered.</p>","PeriodicalId":11126,"journal":{"name":"Dementia and Geriatric Cognitive Disorders","volume":" ","pages":"1-30"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Dementia and Geriatric Cognitive Disorders","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1159/000545907","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Introduction: In this systematic review, we aimed to identify suitable measurement tools for screening individuals for cognitive impairment in Alzheimer's disease (AD). We conducted a comprehensive evaluation of the reliability and validity of cognitive function assessment instruments. We offer insightful suggestions for further research on cognitive function scale development and clinical researchers in AD.
Methods: We searched the PUBMED and CNKI databases for studies aimed at developing or evaluating the validity or reliability of cognitive function assessment scales. The methodological quality of the studies was assessed using the consensus-based standards for the selection of health measurement instruments (COSMIN) according to the 'worst score counts' principle. Subsequently, the measurement properties were rated qualitatively. Results were rated using the modified Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation. Recommendations were categorized into four levels: A, B, C, and D.
Results: We retrieved a total of 804 studies. Following screening, a total of 62 articles were included, which reported 49 cognitive impairment assessment scales. The methodological quality of studies ranged from inadequate to very good, and the measurement properties varied from sufficient (+) to indeterminate (?). We found that the ADAS-Cog, MoCA, BPMSE, CDR and the other 28 scales had sufficient validity and reliability.
Conclusion: Our evaluation according to the COSMIN guidelines suggested that the ADAS-Cog, MoCA, BPMSE, CDR and MMSE could be used to assess the degree of cognitive impairment in patients with AD. When developing cognitive function assessment scales, factors such as time and linguistic and cultural differences could be carefully considered.
期刊介绍：
As a unique forum devoted exclusively to the study of cognitive dysfunction, ''Dementia and Geriatric Cognitive Disorders'' concentrates on Alzheimer’s and Parkinson’s disease, Huntington’s chorea and other neurodegenerative diseases. The journal draws from diverse related research disciplines such as psychogeriatrics, neuropsychology, clinical neurology, morphology, physiology, genetic molecular biology, pathology, biochemistry, immunology, pharmacology and pharmaceutics. Strong emphasis is placed on the publication of research findings from animal studies which are complemented by clinical and therapeutic experience to give an overall appreciation of the field.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
