Dataset Information

Practice effect and test-retest reliability of the Mini-Mental State Examination-2 in people with dementia.

ABSTRACT:

Background

The Mini-Mental State Examination-Second Edition (MMSE-2) consists of three visions: a brief version (MMSE-2:BV), a standard version (MMSE-2:SV), and an expanded version (MMSE-2: EV). Each version was equipped with alternate forms (blue and red). There was a lack of evidence on the practice effect and test-retest reliability of the three versions of the MMSE-2, limiting its utility in both clinical and research settings. The purpose of this study was to examine the practice effect and test-retest reliability of the MMSE-2 in people with dementia.

Methods

One hundred and twenty participants were enrolled, of which 60 were administered with the blue form twice (i.e., the same-form group, [SF group]) and 60 were administered with the blue form first and then the red form (alternate-form group, [AF group]). The practice effect was evaluated using a paired t-test and Cohen's d. The test-retest reliability was examined using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC).

Results

For the practice effects, in the SF group, no statistically significant differences were found for the MMSE-2:BV and MMSE-2: EV total scores and eight subtests (p = 0.061-1.000), except for the MMSE-2:SV total score (p = 0.029). In the AF group, no statistically significant differences were found for all three versions of the total scores and subtests (p = 0.106-1.000), except for the visual-constructional ability subtest (p = 0.010). Cohen's d of all three versions' total scores and subtests were 0.00-0.20 and 0.00-0.26 for SF group and AF group, respectively. For the test-retest reliability, ICC values for all three versions and eight subtests in SF and AF groups were 0.60-0.93 and 0.56-0.93, respectively.

Conclusion

Our results demonstrated that the practice effect could be minimized when alternate forms of the MMSE-2 were used. The MMSE-2 had good to excellent test-retest reliability, except for three subtests (i.e., visual-constructional ability, registration, and recall). Caution should be taken when interpreting the results of visual-constructional ability, registration, and recall subtests of the MMSE-2.

SUBMITTER: Lee YC

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8780811 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThe Clinical Dementia Rating (CDR) and Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) are useful screening tools for mild cognitive impairment (MCI). However, these tests require qualified in-person supervision and the CDR can take up to 60 min to complete. We developed a digital cognitive screening test (M-CogScore) that can be completed remotely in under 5 min without supervision. We set out to validate M-CogScore in head-to-head comparisons with CDR and MMSE.MethodsTo ascertain the validity of the M-CogScore, we enrolled participants as healthy controls or impaired cognition, matched for age, sex, and education. Participants completed the 30-item paper MMSE Second Edition Standard Version (MMSE-2), paper CDR, and smartphone-based M-CogScore. The digital M-CogScore test is based on time-normalised scores from smartphone-adapted Stroop (M-Stroop), digit-symbols (M-Symbols), and delayed recall tests (M-Memory). We used Spearman's correlation coefficient to determine the convergent validity between M-CogScore and the 30-item MMSE-2, and non-parametric tests to determine its discriminative validity with a CDR label of normal (CDR 0) or impaired cognition (CDR 0.5 or 1). M-CogScore was further compared to MMSE-2 using area under the receiver operating characteristic curves (AUC) with corresponding optimal cut-offs.Results72 participants completed all three tests. The M-CogScore correlated with both MMSE-2 (rho = 0.54, p < 0.0001) and impaired cognition on CDR (Mann Whitney U = 187, p < 0.001). M-CogScore achieved an AUC of 0.85 (95% bootstrapped CI [0.80, 0.91]), when differentiating between normal and impaired cognition, compared to an AUC of 0.78 [0.72, 0.84] for MMSE-2 (p = 0.21).ConclusionDigital screening tests such as M-CogScore are desirable to aid in rapid and remote clinical cognitive evaluations. M-CogScore was significantly correlated with established cognitive tests, including CDR and MMSE-2. M-CogScore can be taken remotely without supervision, is automatically scored, has less of a ceiling effect than the MMSE-2, and takes significantly less time to complete.

Project description:The reliability of magnetoencephalography (MEG) resting-state functional connectivity in schizophrenia (SZ) is unknown as previous research has focused on healthy controls (HC). Here, we examined reliability in 26 participants (13-SZ, 13-HC). Eyes opened and eyes closed resting-state data were collected on 4 separate occasions during 2 visits, 1 week apart. For source modeling, we used minimum norm software to apply dynamic statistical parametric mapping. Source analyses compared the following functional connectivity metrics from each data run: coherence (coh), imaginary coherence (imcoh), pairwise phase consistency (ppc), phase-locking value (plv), phase lag index (pli), weighted phase lag index (wpli), and weighted phase lag index debiased (wpli2). Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) were calculated for whole brain, network, and network pair averages. For reliability, ICCs above 0.75 = excellent, above 0.60 = good, above 0.40 = fair, and below 0.40 = poor reliability. We found the reliability of these metrics varied greatly depending on frequency band, network, network pair, and participant group examined. Broadband (1-58 Hz) whole brain averages in both HC and SZ showed excellent reliability for wpli2, and good to fair reliability for ppc, plv, and coh. Broadband network averages showed excellent to good reliability across 1 hour and 1 week for coh, imcoh, ppc, plv, wpli within default mode, cognitive control, and visual networks in HC, while the same metrics had excellent to fair reliability in SZ. Regional network pair averages showed good to fair reliability for coh, ppc, plv within default mode, cognitive control and visual network pairs in HC and SZ. In general, HC had higher reliability compared to SZ, and the default mode, cognitive control, and visual networks had higher reliability compared to somatosensory and auditory networks. Similar reliability levels occurred for both eyes opened and eyes closed resting-states for most metrics. The functional connectivity metrics of coh, ppc, and plv performed best across 1 hour and 1 week in HC and SZ. We also found that SZ had reduced coh, plv, and ppc in the dmn average and pair values indicating dysconnectivity in SZ. These findings encourage collecting both eyes opened and eyes closed resting-state MEG, while demonstrating that clinical populations may differ in reliability.