Dataset Information

The 10/66 Dementia Research Group's fully operationalised DSM-IV dementia computerized diagnostic algorithm, compared with the 10/66 dementia algorithm and a clinician diagnosis: a population validation study.

ABSTRACT: The criterion for dementia implicit in DSM-IV is widely used in research but not fully operationalised. The 10/66 Dementia Research Group sought to do this using assessments from their one phase dementia diagnostic research interview, and to validate the resulting algorithm in a population-based study in Cuba.The criterion was operationalised as a computerised algorithm, applying clinical principles, based upon the 10/66 cognitive tests, clinical interview and informant reports; the Community Screening Instrument for Dementia, the CERAD 10 word list learning and animal naming tests, the Geriatric Mental State, and the History and Aetiology Schedule - Dementia Diagnosis and Subtype. This was validated in Cuba against a local clinician DSM-IV diagnosis and the 10/66 dementia diagnosis (originally calibrated probabilistically against clinician DSM-IV diagnoses in the 10/66 pilot study).The DSM-IV sub-criteria were plausibly distributed among clinically diagnosed dementia cases and controls. The clinician diagnoses agreed better with 10/66 dementia diagnosis than with the more conservative computerized DSM-IV algorithm. The DSM-IV algorithm was particularly likely to miss less severe dementia cases. Those with a 10/66 dementia diagnosis who did not meet the DSM-IV criterion were less cognitively and functionally impaired compared with the DSMIV confirmed cases, but still grossly impaired compared with those free of dementia.The DSM-IV criterion, strictly applied, defines a narrow category of unambiguous dementia characterized by marked impairment. It may be specific but incompletely sensitive to clinically relevant cases. The 10/66 dementia diagnosis defines a broader category that may be more sensitive, identifying genuine cases beyond those defined by our DSM-IV algorithm, with relevance to the estimation of the population burden of this disorder.

SUBMITTER: Prince MJ

PROVIDER: S-EPMC2474864 | biostudies-literature | 2008 Jun

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

The 10/66 Dementia Research Group's fully operationalised DSM-IV dementia computerized diagnostic algorithm, compared with the 10/66 dementia algorithm and a clinician diagnosis: a population validation study.

Prince Martin J MJ de Rodriguez Juan Llibre JL Noriega L L Lopez A A Acosta Daisy D Albanese Emiliano E Arizaga Raul R Copeland John R M JR Dewey Michael M Ferri Cleusa P CP Guerra Mariella M Huang Yueqin Y Jacob K S KS Krishnamoorthy E S ES McKeigue Paul P Sousa Renata R Stewart Robert J RJ Salas Aquiles A Sosa Ana Luisa AL Uwakwa Richard R

BMC public health 20080624

<h4>Background</h4>The criterion for dementia implicit in DSM-IV is widely used in research but not fully operationalised. The 10/66 Dementia Research Group sought to do this using assessments from their one phase dementia diagnostic research interview, and to validate the resulting algorithm in a population-based study in Cuba.<h4>Methods</h4>The criterion was operationalised as a computerised algorithm, applying clinical principles, based upon the 10/66 cognitive tests, clinical interview and ...[more]

PMID: 18577205

Similar Datasets

Project description:To develop and evaluate a short version of the 10/66 dementia diagnostic schedule for use in low-income and middle-income countries.Split-half analysis for algorithm development and testing; cross-evaluation of short-schedule and standard-schedule algorithms in 12 community surveys.(1) The 10/66 pilot sample data set of people aged 60 years and over in 25 international centres each recruiting the following samples: (a) dementia; (b) depression, no dementia; (c) no dementia, high education and (d) no dementia, low education. (2) Cross-sectional surveys of people aged 65 years or more from 12 urban and rural sites in 8 countries (Cuba, Dominican Republic, Peru, Mexico, Venezuela, India, China and Puerto Rico).In the 10/66 pilot samples, the algorithm for the short schedule was developed in 1218 participants and tested in 1211 randomly selected participants; it was evaluated against the algorithm for the standard 10/66 schedule in 16 536 survey participants.The short diagnostic schedule was derived from the Community Screening Instrument for Dementia, the CERAD 10-word list recall task and the Euro-D depression screen; it was evaluated against clinically assigned groups in the pilot data and against the standard schedule (using the Geriatric Mental State (GMS) rather than Euro-D) in the surveys.In the pilot test sample, the short-schedule algorithm ascertained dementia with 94.2% sensitivity. Specificities were 80.2% in depression, 96.6% in the high-education group and 92.7% in the low-education group. In survey samples, it coincided with standard algorithm dementia classifications with over 95% accuracy in most sites. Estimated dementia prevalences in the survey samples were not consistently higher or lower using the short compared to standard schedule.For epidemiological studies of dementia in low-income and middle-income settings where the GMS interview (and/or interviewer training required) is not feasible, the short 10/66 schedule and algorithm provide an alternative with acceptable levels of performance.

Project description:ObjectivesTo determine the criterion and concurrent validity of the Italian version of the short 10/66 Dementia Diagnostic Schedule and algorithm in a sample of Italian native speakers, older adults.DesignA cross-sectional, validation study.SettingThe study was conducted with older adults living in the community and in nursing homes in the Canton of Ticino, Switzerland, and the Piedmont region in Italy between March and August 2019.ParticipantsA convenience sample of 229 participants (69% females) were recruited. The eligibility criteria were being ≥60 years old and having an informant. The final sample included 74 participants (32%) with a previous clinical diagnosis of dementia and 155 (68%) cognitively healthy older adults.Primary and secondary outcome measuresThe short version of 10/66 Dementia Diagnostic Schedule consists of the Community Screening Instrument for Dementia, the Consortium to Establish a Registry for Alzheimer's Disease (CERAD) 10-word list learning task with delayed recall and the depression scale, Euro-Depression (EURO-D) scale. Disability was measured using the WHO Disability Assessment Schedule (WHO-DAS II).ResultsThe Italian version of the short 10/66 Dementia Diagnostic Schedule showed fair sensitivity (87%), specificity (61%) and agreement with the clinical diagnosis of dementia (kappa=0.40, area under the receiver operating characteristics curve=0.74). Older adults with dementia living in nursing homes had higher disability scores (WHO-DAS II mean=23.14, SE=1.29) than those living in the community (WHO-DAS II mean=7.08, SE=0.66). WHO-DAS II was positively correlated with the short version of the 10/66 dementia diagnosis (β=5.23, 95% CI 2.05 to 8.41).ConclusionsIn settings where lengthy diagnostic procedures are not feasible, the short 10/66 is a practical tool to identify dementia in older adults. Our findings extend evidence on the validity of the 10/66 dementia diagnostic algorithm to high-income countries, where epidemiological evidence on dementia and its impact is outdated.

Project description:BackgroundLatin America, China and India are experiencing unprecedentedly rapid demographic ageing with an increasing number of people with dementia. The 10/66 Dementia Research Group's title refers to the 66% of people with dementia that live in developing countries and the less than one tenth of population-based research carried out in those settings. This paper describes the protocols for the 10/66 population-based and intervention studies that aim to redress this imbalance.Methods/designCross-sectional comprehensive one phase surveys have been conducted of all residents aged 65 and over of geographically defined catchment areas in ten low and middle income countries (India, China, Nigeria, Cuba, Dominican Republic, Brazil, Venezuela, Mexico, Peru and Argentina), with a sample size of between 1000 and 3000 (generally 2000). Each of the studies uses the same core minimum data set with cross-culturally validated assessments (dementia diagnosis and subtypes, mental disorders, physical health, anthropometry, demographics, extensive non communicable disease risk factor questionnaires, disability/functioning, health service utilisation, care arrangements and caregiver strain). Nested within the population based studies is a randomised controlled trial of a caregiver intervention for people with dementia and their families (ISRCTN41039907; ISRCTN41062011; ISRCTN95135433; ISRCTN66355402; ISRCTN93378627; ISRCTN94921815). A follow up of 2.5 to 3.5 years will be conducted in 7 countries (China, Cuba, Dominican Republic, Venezuela, Mexico, Peru and Argentina) to assess risk factors for incident dementia, stroke and all cause and cause-specific mortality; verbal autopsy will be used to identify causes of death.DiscussionThe 10/66 DRG baseline population-based studies are nearly complete. The incidence phase will be completed in 2009. All investigators are committed to establish an anonymised file sharing archive with monitored public access. Our aim is to create an evidence base to empower advocacy, raise awareness about dementia, and ensure that the health and social care needs of older people are anticipated and met.

Dataset Information

The 10/66 Dementia Research Group's fully operationalised DSM-IV dementia computerized diagnostic algorithm, compared with the 10/66 dementia algorithm and a clinician diagnosis: a population validation study.

Publications

The 10/66 Dementia Research Group's fully operationalised DSM-IV dementia computerized diagnostic algorithm, compared with the 10/66 dementia algorithm and a clinician diagnosis: a population validation study.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets