Validity of the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) Index Scores: a Comparison with the Cognitive Domain Scores of the Seoul Neuropsychological Screening Battery (SNSB).

Dementia and neurocognitive disorders Pub Date : 2021-07-01 Epub Date: 2021-07-27 DOI:10.12779/dnd.2021.20.3.28
Haeyoon Kim, Kyung-Ho Yu, Byung-Chul Lee, Byeong-Chae Kim, Yeonwook Kang
{"title":"Validity of the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) Index Scores: a Comparison with the Cognitive Domain Scores of the Seoul Neuropsychological Screening Battery (SNSB).","authors":"Haeyoon Kim, Kyung-Ho Yu, Byung-Chul Lee, Byeong-Chae Kim, Yeonwook Kang","doi":"10.12779/dnd.2021.20.3.28","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background and Purpose A new approach was proposed to score the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) index scores for 6 cognitive domains: orientation (OIS), attention (AIS), language (LIS), visuospatial function (VIS), memory (MIS), and executive function (EIS). This study investigated whether the MoCA index scores represent the functions of each cognitive domain by examining the correlations with the corresponding cognitive domain scores derived from conventional neuropsychological tests included in the Seoul Neuropsychological Screening Battery, 2nd Edition (SNSB-II). Methods The participants were 104 amnestic mild cognitive impairment (aMCI), 74 vascular mild cognitive impairment (VaMCI), 73 dementia of the Alzheimer's type (DAT), and 41 vascular dementia (VaD) patients. All participants were administered the Korean-MoCA and SNSB-II. Results Like the MoCA total score, the MoCA-OIS, MoCA-VIS, and MoCA-MIS showed differences between aMCI and AD groups and between VaMCI and VaD groups. The MoCA-AIS, MoCA-LIS, and MoCA-EIS showed significant differences between VaMCI and VaD groups, but no difference between aMCI and DAT groups. In the aMCI and VaMCI groups, all index scores of the MoCA showed significant correlations with the corresponding cognitive domain scores of the SNSB-II. Except for MoCA-MIS, the MoCA-AIS, MoCA-LIS, MoCA-VIS, and MoCA-EIS also showed significant correlations with the corresponding domain scores of the SNSB-II in the DAT and VaD groups. Conclusions These results indicate that all MoCA index scores, except for MoCA-MIS, which does not reflect the severity of memory impairment in dementia patients, provide highly valid information on the function of each cognitive domain in patients with mild cognitive impairment and dementia.","PeriodicalId":72779,"journal":{"name":"Dementia and neurocognitive disorders","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/87/8c/dnd-20-28.PMC8326308.pdf","citationCount":"11","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Dementia and neurocognitive disorders","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.12779/dnd.2021.20.3.28","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2021/7/27 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 11

Abstract

Background and Purpose A new approach was proposed to score the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) index scores for 6 cognitive domains: orientation (OIS), attention (AIS), language (LIS), visuospatial function (VIS), memory (MIS), and executive function (EIS). This study investigated whether the MoCA index scores represent the functions of each cognitive domain by examining the correlations with the corresponding cognitive domain scores derived from conventional neuropsychological tests included in the Seoul Neuropsychological Screening Battery, 2nd Edition (SNSB-II). Methods The participants were 104 amnestic mild cognitive impairment (aMCI), 74 vascular mild cognitive impairment (VaMCI), 73 dementia of the Alzheimer's type (DAT), and 41 vascular dementia (VaD) patients. All participants were administered the Korean-MoCA and SNSB-II. Results Like the MoCA total score, the MoCA-OIS, MoCA-VIS, and MoCA-MIS showed differences between aMCI and AD groups and between VaMCI and VaD groups. The MoCA-AIS, MoCA-LIS, and MoCA-EIS showed significant differences between VaMCI and VaD groups, but no difference between aMCI and DAT groups. In the aMCI and VaMCI groups, all index scores of the MoCA showed significant correlations with the corresponding cognitive domain scores of the SNSB-II. Except for MoCA-MIS, the MoCA-AIS, MoCA-LIS, MoCA-VIS, and MoCA-EIS also showed significant correlations with the corresponding domain scores of the SNSB-II in the DAT and VaD groups. Conclusions These results indicate that all MoCA index scores, except for MoCA-MIS, which does not reflect the severity of memory impairment in dementia patients, provide highly valid information on the function of each cognitive domain in patients with mild cognitive impairment and dementia.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

蒙特利尔认知评估(MoCA)指数得分的效度:与首尔神经心理筛选组(SNSB)认知领域得分的比较。
背景与目的:提出了一种新的蒙特利尔认知评估(MoCA)指数评分方法,对定向(OIS)、注意(AIS)、语言(LIS)、视觉空间功能(VIS)、记忆(MIS)和执行功能(EIS) 6个认知领域进行评分。本研究通过检查MoCA指数得分与首尔神经心理筛查手册第二版(SNSB-II)中常规神经心理测试中相应认知领域得分的相关性,探讨了MoCA指数得分是否代表了每个认知领域的功能。方法:选取遗忘性轻度认知障碍(aMCI) 104例,血管性轻度认知障碍(VaMCI) 74例,阿尔茨海默氏型痴呆(DAT) 73例,血管性痴呆(VaD) 41例。所有参与者均接受Korean-MoCA和SNSB-II测试。结果:与MoCA总分一样,MoCA- ois、MoCA- vis、MoCA- mis在aMCI组与AD组、VaMCI组与VaD组之间存在差异。VaMCI组与VaD组间MoCA-AIS、MoCA-LIS、MoCA-EIS差异有统计学意义,aMCI组与DAT组间差异无统计学意义。在aMCI组和VaMCI组中,MoCA的所有指标得分与SNSB-II相应的认知域得分呈显著相关。除MoCA-MIS外,在DAT组和VaD组中,MoCA-AIS、MoCA-LIS、MoCA-VIS和MoCA-EIS也与SNSB-II相应结构域得分呈显著相关。结论:这些结果表明,除了MoCA- mis评分不能反映痴呆患者记忆障碍的严重程度外,所有MoCA指数评分都为轻度认知障碍和痴呆患者各认知域的功能提供了高度有效的信息。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信