SCIENTIFIC HUB

Follow the evidence.

SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE · MED

Modifying the Mini-Cog to Screen for Cognitive Impairment in Nonliterate Individuals.

Int J Alzheimers Dis · 2021-08-16

DOI: 10.1155/2021/5510093PMID: 34447592

Open accessresearch-article; Journal ArticleOriginal source ↗

Research overview

The text below is the source article’s original abstract under a verified reuse license. cc by

ObjectivesThe Mini-Cog, a rapid, valid, and reliable screening tool for cognitive impairment, consists of 3-word recall and an executive clock drawing test (CDT). However, CDT requires at least basic literacy and cultural exposure to analog clocks, conditions not met in many population groups around the world. We developed a modification of the Mini-Cog (MMC) for use with nonliterate and literate individuals.MethodsParticipants were adults (≥60 years) with no neurological diagnosis, with known cognitive impairment due to stroke, Parkinsonism, traumatic brain injury, or Alzheimer's disease, and whose family members were able to read and write. We replaced the CDT with two tasks of everyday life: a serial subtraction task or a multistep performance task. Family members rated the acceptability and feasibility of the Mini-Cog versions using a 6-point scale and completed a proxy-rated cognitive staging tool, the Dementia Severity Rating Scale (DSRS). Spearman's rho, Mann-Whitney U, and chi-square tests were used to evaluate group differences and associations between measures.ResultsData were collected from 63 participants (75% ≥ 60 years, 67% nonliterate). Literacy was associated with CDT (chi-square strength 0.9, p p ConclusionsTwo alternate distractor tasks may successfully replace CDT in the Mini-Cog. The MMC versions are promising and deserve further study as screening tools for cognitive impairment in larger and more fully characterized samples.

Scientific assessment

01

Research question

Assess the question within the original study’s scope.

02

Methods & sample

Check the source article for study design and sample details.

03

Key findings

An editorially approved findings summary is not yet published for this record.

04

Limitations

Generalizability, bias and clinical meaning require separate assessment.

Methods, samples and clinical conclusions are not inferred from bibliographic metadata.