Comparison of the diagnostic accuracy of five cross-cultural cognitive screening instruments for dementia and mild cognitive impairment in a multicultural memory clinic sample

BackgroundWith the changing demographic landscape in most countries worldwide, early identification of cognitive impairment in multicultural populations is increasingly relevant.ObjectiveTo compare the diagnostic accuracy of the Brief Assessment of Impaired Cognition (BASIC), BASIC Questionnaire (BASIC-Q), Category Cued Memory Test (CCMT), Multicultural Cognitive Examination (MCE), and Rowland Universal Dementia Assessment Scale (RUDAS) for dementia and mild cognitive impairment (MCI) in a multicultural memory clinic sample.MethodsThe study was a cross-sectional multi-center study across six sites in five European countries. All cognitive screening instruments were available in the majority languages of the collaborating countries. Participants with immigrant status were generally assessed in their first language by multilingual researchers or through interpreter-mediated assessment. Correlation analysis was used to explore associations between scores on the cognitive screening instruments. Receiver operating characteristic curve (ROC) analysis was used to examine diagnostic accuracy for dementia and MCI as compared to specialist diagnosis.ResultsThe study included 187 participants (94 cognitively intact, 36 MCI, 57 dementia), of which 105 (56%) had immigrant background. All cognitive screening instruments were strongly correlated and had high diagnostic accuracy for dementia (areas under the ROC curve (AUCs) in the range 0.86-0.97) and moderate to high diagnostic accuracy for MCI (AUCs in the range 0.72-0.86), with the MCE, BASIC, and BASIC-Q showing the best diagnostic properties. Overall, diagnostic accuracy for cognitive impairment (dementia or MCI) did not significantly differ between European native-born and immigrant participants, or between participants with <7 compared to ≥7 years of formal schooling.ConclusionsIn the present study, the MCE, BASIC, and BASIC-Q showed better diagnostic properties than the RUDAS and CCMT for the diagnosis of dementia and MCI in a multicultural memory clinic sample.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Alzheimer s Disease
Published
2025-06-22
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1177/13872877251351037
Citations
3
Primary Topic
Dementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
4.41

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Comparison of the diagnostic accuracy of five cross-cultural cognitive screening instruments for dementia and mild cognitive impairment in a multicultural memory clinic sample

Sanne Franzen, Alfonso Delgado‐Álvarez, T. Rune Nielsen, Álvaro Lozano-Ruiz et al.
3 citations
Journal of Alzheimer s Disease
Dementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
4.41
article

Comparison of the diagnostic accuracy of five cross-cultural cognitive screening instruments for dementia and mild cognitive impairment in a multicultural memory clinic sample

Sanne Franzen, Alfonso Delgado‐Álvarez, T. Rune Nielsen, Álvaro Lozano-Ruiz, Juliette Palisson, Kasper Jørgensen, Naaheed Mukadam, Maria Özden, Gunhild Waldemar
article en
3 citations

Abstract

BackgroundWith the changing demographic landscape in most countries worldwide, early identification of cognitive impairment in multicultural populations is increasingly relevant.ObjectiveTo compare the diagnostic accuracy of the Brief Assessment of Impaired Cognition (BASIC), BASIC Questionnaire (BASIC-Q), Category Cued Memory Test (CCMT), Multicultural Cognitive Examination (MCE), and Rowland Universal Dementia Assessment Scale (RUDAS) for dementia and mild cognitive impairment (MCI) in a multicultural memory clinic sample.MethodsThe study was a cross-sectional multi-center study across six sites in five European countries. All cognitive screening instruments were available in the majority languages of the collaborating countries. Participants with immigrant status were generally assessed in their first language by multilingual researchers or through interpreter-mediated assessment. Correlation analysis was used to explore associations between scores on the cognitive screening instruments. Receiver operating characteristic curve (ROC) analysis was used to examine diagnostic accuracy for dementia and MCI as compared to specialist diagnosis.ResultsThe study included 187 participants (94 cognitively intact, 36 MCI, 57 dementia), of which 105 (56%) had immigrant background. All cognitive screening instruments were strongly correlated and had high diagnostic accuracy for dementia (areas under the ROC curve (AUCs) in the range 0.86-0.97) and moderate to high diagnostic accuracy for MCI (AUCs in the range 0.72-0.86), with the MCE, BASIC, and BASIC-Q showing the best diagnostic properties. Overall, diagnostic accuracy for cognitive impairment (dementia or MCI) did not significantly differ between European native-born and immigrant participants, or between participants with <7 compared to ≥7 years of formal schooling.ConclusionsIn the present study, the MCE, BASIC, and BASIC-Q showed better diagnostic properties than the RUDAS and CCMT for the diagnosis of dementia and MCI in a multicultural memory clinic sample.

Journal of Alzheimer s DiseaseVol. 106(3)
Universidad Complutense de Madrid (ES), University of Copenhagen (DK), North East London NHS Foundation Trust (GB), Erasmus MC (NL), Valencian International University (ES), Copenhagen University Hospital (DK), Rigshospitalet (DK), Hospital Clínico San Carlos (ES), Université Sorbonne Paris Nord (FR), Assistance Publique – Hôpitaux de Paris (FR), University College London (GB)
Velux Fonden, ZonMw, Ministeriet Sundhed Forebyggelse, Instituto de Salud Carlos III
Openalex Percentile: Top 6%
Dementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
4.41
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.