Comparative Characteristic of Screening Scales for Cognitive Impairment Assessment

L.S. Milevska-Vovchuk


The paper describes the results of the comparative analysis of three cognitive screening scales: Mini-Mental state examination (MMSE), Mini-Cog test, Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA). Neuropsychological examination was conducted in 25 patients with cerebrovascular diseases. It was found out that the performance of Mini-Cog test took 3 minutes approximately, while MMSE — 10 minutes, and MoCA — 13–15 min. The duration of the test impact the level of fatigue and exhaustion of patients. The results of Mini-Cog test do not depend on the initial level of education, culture and language. However, this test was the least sensitive and could only diagnose severe and moderate cognitive impairment. Among the advantages of MMSE were the possibility to determine the level of cognitive impairment according to the number of points and its higher sensitivity compared to Mini-Cog test. The most sensitive screening test was MoCA, but up to now formalized system of this test evaluation does not give possibility to rank the severity of cognitive impairments, according to the number of points.
Thus, the results of the research show that the neuropsychological methods should be selected taking into account the clinical situation and the conditions in which it is conducted. This comparative analysis of cognitive screening scales can be used in the preparation of diagnostic search for effective verification of the early changes in the intellectual and mental functions.


cognitive impairment; Mini-Mental state examination; Mini-Cog test; Montreal Cognitive Assessment


Захаров В.В. Нейропсихологические тесты: необходимость и возможность применения // Consilium medicum. — 2011. — Т. 12, № 2. — С. 98-106.

Левин О.С. Диагностика и лечение деменции в клинической практике / О.С. Левин — М.: МЕДпрес-информ, 2010. — 256 с.

Мищенко Т.С. Сосудистая деменция / Т.С. Мищенко, В.Н. Мищенко // НейроNews: психоневрология и нейропсихиатрия. — 2011. — № 2/1. — С. 32-34.

Преображенская И.С. Легкие и умеренные когнитивные нарушения — клинические проявления, этиология, патогенез, возможности использования ноотропной терапии // Фарматека. — 2013. — № s4-13. — С. 14-18.

Adams K.M., Grant I. Neuropsychological Assessment of Neuropsychiatric and Neuromedical Disorders. — 3rd ed. — New York, NY: Oxford University Press, 2009.

Bird C.M., Papadppoulou K., Ricciardelli P. et al. Monitoring cognitive changes: psychometric properties of six cognitive tests // British Journal of Clinical Psychology. — 2004. — Vol. 43. — P. 197-210.

Borson S., Scanlan J.M., Chen P., Ganguli M. The Mini-Cog as a screen for dementia: validation in a population-based sample // J. Am. Geriatr. Soc. — 2003. — 51(10). — 1451-1454.

McCarten J.R., Anderson P., Kuskowski M.A. et al. Finding dementia in primary care: the results of a clinical demonstration project // J. Am. Geriаtr. Soc. — 2012. — 60(2). — 210-217.

Folstein M.F., Folstein S.E. & McHugh R.P. A practical method for grading the cognitive state of patients for the clinician // Journal of psychiatric research. — 1975. — 12(3). — 189-98.

Gualtieri T.C. Dementia Screening Using Computerized Tests // Journal of Insurance Medicine. — 2004. — Vol. 36. — P. 213-227.

Ismail Z., Rajji T. & Shulman K. Brief cognitive screening instruments: An update // International Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry. — 2010. — 25(2). — 111-120.

Lessig M., Scanlan J., Nazemi H. & Borson S. Time that tells: Critical clock-drawing errors for dementia screening // International Psychogeriatrics. — 2008. — 20(3). — 459-470.

Lezak M.D., Howieson D.B., Loring D.W. Neuropsychological assessment. — 4th ed. — New York, NY: Oxford University Press, 2004.

Moorhouse P., Rockwood K. Vascular cognitive impairment: current concepts and clinical developments // Lancet neurology. — 2008. — Vol. 7. — P. 246-255.

Nasreddine Z.S., Phillips N.A., Bedirian V. et al. The Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA): A Brief Screening Tool For Mild Cognitive Impairment // Journal of the American Geriatrics Society. — 2005. — Vol. 53. — P. 695-699.

Neuchterlein K.H., Green M.F., Kern R.S. et al. The MATRICS consensus cognitive battery: Part 1. Test selection, reliability, and validity // Am. J. Psychiatry. — 2008. — 165. — 203-213.

Palmer K., Wang H.-X., Backman L. et al. Differential evolution of cognitive impairment in nondemented older persons // Am. J. Psychiatry. — 2002. —159. — 436-42.

Petersen R.C. Mild cognitive impairment as a diagnostic entity // J. Int. Med. — 2004. — 256. — 183-94.

Zakzanis K.K., Jeffay E. Neurocognitive variability in high-functioning individuals: Implications for the practice of clinical neuropsychology // Psychol. Rep. — 2011. — 108. — 290-300.


Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.


© Publishing House Zaslavsky, 1997-2019


   Seo анализ сайта