We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
The Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) is used for screening mild cognitive impairment (MCI), and the Beijing version (MoCA-BJ) is widely used in China. We aimed to develop a computerized tool for MoCA-BJ (MoCA-CC).
Methods:
MoCA-CC used person-machine interaction instead of patient-to-physician interaction; other aspects such as the scoring system did not differ from the original test. MoCA-CC, MoCA-BJ and routine neuropsychological tests were administered to 181 elderly participants (MCI = 96, normal controls [NC] = 85).
Results:
A total of 176 (97.24%) participants were evaluated successfully by MoCA-CC. Cronbach's α for MoCA-CC was 0.72. The test–retest reliability (retesting after six weeks) was good (intraclass correlation coefficient = 0.82; P < 0.001). Significant differences were observed in total scores (t = 9.38, P < 0.001) and individual item scores (t = 2.18–8.62, P < 0.05) between the NC and MCI groups, except for the score for “Naming” (t = 0.24, P = 0.81). The MoCA-CC total scores were highly correlated with the MoCA-BJ total scores (r = 0.93, P < 0.001) in the MCI participants. The area under receiver–operator curve for the prediction of MCI was 0.97 (95% confidence interval = 0.95–1.00). At the optimal cut-off score of 25/26, MoCA-CC demonstrated 95.8% sensitivity and 87.1% specificity.
Conclusion:
The MoCA-CC tool developed here has several advantages over the paper-pencil method and is reliable for screening MCI in elderly Chinese individuals, especially in the primary clinical setting. It needs to be validated in other diverse and larger populations.
Recommend this
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.