ReviewsNovember 5, 2013

Screening for Cognitive Impairment in Older Adults: A Systematic Review for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force

FREE
    Author, Article, and Disclosure Information

    Abstract

    This article has been corrected. The original version (PDF) is appended to this article as a supplement.

    Background:

    Earlier identification of cognitive impairment may reduce patient and caregiver morbidity.

    Purpose:

    To systematically review the diagnostic accuracy of brief cognitive screening instruments and the benefits and harms of pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic interventions for early cognitive impairment.

    Data Sources:

    MEDLINE, PsycINFO, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials through December 2012; systematic reviews; clinical trial registries; and experts.

    Study Selection:

    English-language studies of fair to good quality, primary care–feasible screening instruments, and treatments aimed at persons with mild cognitive impairment or mild to moderate dementia.

    Data Extraction:

    Dual quality assessment and abstraction of relevant study details.

    Data Synthesis:

    The Mini-Mental State Examination (k = 25) is the most thoroughly studied instrument but is not available for use without cost. Publicly available instruments with adequate test performance to detect dementia include the Clock Drawing Test (k = 7), Mini-Cog (k = 4), Memory Impairment Screen (k = 5), Abbreviated Mental Test (k = 4), Short Portable Mental Status Questionnaire (k = 4), Free and Cued Selective Reminding Test (k = 2), 7-Minute Screen (k = 2), and Informant Questionnaire on Cognitive Decline in the Elderly (k = 5). Medications approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration for Alzheimer disease (k = 58) and caregiver interventions (k = 59) show a small benefit of uncertain clinical importance for patients and their caregivers. Small benefits are also limited by common adverse effects of acetylcholinesterase inhibitors and limited availability of complex caregiver interventions. Although promising, cognitive stimulation (k = 6) and exercise (k = 10) have limited evidence to support their use in persons with mild to moderate dementia or mild cognitive impairment.

    Limitation:

    Limited studies in persons with dementia other than Alzheimer disease and sparse reporting of important health outcomes.

    Conclusion:

    Brief instruments to screen for cognitive impairment can adequately detect dementia, but there is no empirical evidence that screening improves decision making. Whether interventions for patients or their caregivers have a clinically significant effect in persons with earlier detected cognitive impairment is still unclear.

    Primary Funding Source:

    Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality.

    Dementia, a decline in cognitive function severe enough to affect social or occupational functioning (1), can be due to Alzheimer disease (AD), vascular dementia, frontotemporal dementia, dementia with Lewy bodies, Parkinson disease with dementia, dementia of mixed cause, or many rarer causes (2). Although the exact prevalence is unknown, researchers estimate that dementia affects between 2.4 million and 5.5 million Americans (2–4). Mild cognitive impairment (MCI) differs from dementia in that it is not severe enough to interfere with independence in daily life (for example, instrumental activities of daily living [IADLs]); however, it may be useful for predicting dementia.

    Primary care clinicians may not recognize cognitive impairment when using routine history and physical examination (3, 5) in as many as 76% of patients with dementia or probable dementia (6–8), and most of these patients are not diagnosed until they are at moderate to severe stages of the disease (9). Early identification of cognitive impairment would ideally allow patients and their families to receive care at an earlier stage in the disease process, which could lead to improved prognosis and decreased morbidity. Health, psychological, and social benefits from early recognition of dementia through education and improved decision making may make screening valuable even if early treatment cannot alter the natural history of dementia by preventing or slowing the rate of cognitive decline (10).

    In 2003, the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) concluded that there was insufficient evidence to recommend for or against routine screening for dementia in older adults (I statement) (11). We conducted this systematic review to support the USPSTF in updating its prior recommendation. The current review addresses the benefits, harms, and diagnostic accuracy of brief screening instruments to detect cognitive impairment in community-dwelling older adults and the benefits and harms of the commonly used treatment and management options for older adults with MCI or early dementia and their caregivers.

    Methods

    Our review included 5 key questions. First, does screening for cognitive impairment in community-dwelling older adults in primary care–relevant settings improve decision-making, patient, family or caregiver, or societal outcomes? Second, what is the test performance of screening instruments to detect cognitive impairment in elderly, community-dwelling primary care patients? Third, what are the harms of screening for cognitive impairment? Fourth, do interventions for MCI or mild to moderate dementia in older adults improve decision-making, patient, family or caregiver, or societal outcomes? Fifth, what are the harms of interventions for cognitive impairment?

    Detailed methods, including the analytic framework, search strategies, flow diagrams of the search and selection processes, detailed inclusion criteria, quality assessment, excluded studies, and description of data analyses are publicly available in our full evidence report at www.uspreventiveservicestaskforce.org.

    Data Sources and Searches

    We first searched for systematic reviews published since 2001 by using MEDLINE; the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews; the Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects; and publications from the Institute of Medicine, the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ), and the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. We used the most relevant existing systematic reviews—1 on screening for dementia (3) and 11 on treatment of dementia and MCI (12–22)—to identify primary studies for inclusion and to develop comprehensive search strategies for each question. We searched MEDLINE, PsycINFO, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials from the end search dates of existing reviews until 10 December 2012. We supplemented our searches with expert suggestions, reference lists of systematic reviews, and trial registry platforms for ongoing trials.

    Study Selection

    Two investigators independently reviewed 16 179 abstracts and 1190 articles (Figure 1) against the specified inclusion criteria (Appendix Table 1). We resolved discrepancies through consensus and consultation with a third investigator. We included fair- to good-quality English-language studies of community-dwelling adults that were most applicable to primary care in the United States. For screening questions, we included studies that evaluated any brief screening instrument that could be delivered by a clinician in primary care in 10 minutes or less or self-administered in 20 minutes or less. Screening instruments could be administered to the patient or an informant. For treatment questions, we included the major pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic interventions intended for use in older adults with MCI or mild to moderate dementia, excluding Parkinson dementia, to approximate persons with “screen-detected” cognitive impairment. We considered any decision-making, patient, or caregiver health outcome. For harms of screening, we considered any study design reporting harms, including psychological harms and those due to labeling or poor adherence to diagnostic follow-up. For harms of treatment, we focused primarily on serious harms that resulted in unexpected medical care, illness, or death for interventions that showed any evidence of benefit.

    Figure 1. Summary of evidence search and selection.

    SER = systematic evidence review.

    Appendix Table 1. Inclusion Criteria
    Data Extraction and Quality Assessment

    One investigator extracted data, and a second investigator checked the extraction. Two reviewers independently appraised all articles by using the USPSTF's design-specific quality criteria (28). We supplemented these criteria with the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence methodology checklists (29), AMSTAR (A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews) for systematic reviews (30), the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale for observational studies (31), and QUADAS (Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies) for studies of diagnostic accuracy (32). Fair-quality (as opposed to good-quality) studies did not meet at least 1 criterion but had no important limitations that would invalidate the results. The most common limitations in studies excluded because of poor quality were verification bias in diagnostic studies and greater than 40% attrition or inability to assess for criteria due to limited reporting in trials.

    Data Synthesis and Analysis

    For diagnostic accuracy studies on screening for MCI or dementia, our primary outcomes of interest were sensitivity and specificity at a given cut point for the instrument, by instrument type (according to length of administration) and separated by detection of dementia, MCI, or both. We synthesized and reported the results for the most commonly used cut points, when applicable. We conducted quantitative syntheses of sensitivity and specificity if sufficient data were presented in more than 2 similar studies based on populations, scoring or cut points, and outcomes. We ran a bivariate model using the “metandi” procedure in Stata 11.2 (StataCorp, College Station, Texas), which models sensitivity and specificity simultaneously, thus accounting for the correlation between these variables (33).

    For treatment trials, we grouped interventions into 4 broad categories: U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA)–approved medications to treat AD, other medications or dietary supplements, nonpharmacologic interventions for caregiver–patient dyads, and nonpharmacologic interventions meant primarily for the patient. We synthesized results within each category and examined results and the association of key study characteristics with results and effect sizes on commonly reported outcomes. Characteristics included age, sex, severity of cognitive impairment of the patient, caregiver hours, setting, country, intervention components, dosing frequency or intensity, length of follow-up, and study quality. Commonly reported outcomes included measures of cognition, global functioning, and physical functioning. For assessment of global cognitive function, the most commonly used measures in our included studies were the Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale-Cognitive Subscale (ADAS-cog) (34) and the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE). Assessment of global function was not commonly reported except in trials evaluating FDA-approved medications for AD, which used the Clinician Interview-Based Impression of Change Plus Caregiver Input (CIBIC-plus) (35). Global physical functioning was measured by various instruments that captured the patient's ability to complete basic ADLs (36) or IADLs (37). The most commonly reported caregiver outcomes were caregiver burden, usually measured with the Zarit Caregiver Burden Interview (38), and caregiver depression, usually measured with the Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale (39).

    We conducted quantitative analyses on important patient outcomes reported in most trials. We analyzed a standardized effect size (Hedge g) based on the differences in change between groups from baseline to follow-up using standard formulas (40–42). For global cognitive measures, a change of 4 points or more on the ADAS-cog over 6 months was considered a clinically important improvement in mild to moderate dementia (43). For standardized effect sizes, standardized mean differences of 0.2 to less than 0.5 were considered small, those 0.5 to less than 0.8 were considered medium, and those 0.8 or greater were considered large (44). We used meta-regressions and visual inspection of forest plots to explore heterogeneity of effect sizes. We assessed the presence of statistical heterogeneity among the studies by using standard chi-square tests and estimated the magnitude of heterogeneity using the I2 statistic (45). Publication bias was assessed using tests to examine for bias due to small-study effects (46, 47). We used Stata 11.2 for all statistical analyses.

    Role of the Funding Source

    The study was funded by AHRQ under a contract to support the work of the USPSTF. Members of the USPSTF and the AHRQ medical officer assisted in the development of the scope of this review.

    Results

    We found no trials that directly assessed whether screening for cognitive impairment in primary care could affect decision-making, patient or caregiver, or societal outcomes (key question 1) (Figure 1). No studies directly addressed the adverse psychological effects of screening or adverse effects from false-positive or false-negative test results (key question 3). We found only 1 fair-quality study showing that approximately half of older adults with positive screening test results for cognitive impairment declined to complete a formal diagnostic work-up for dementia (48, 49). Included evidence, therefore, focused on the diagnostic accuracy of screening instruments (key question 2) and the benefits and harms of different treatment and management options in older adults with early cognitive impairment (key questions 4 and 5). Detailed results are publicly available in our full evidence report at www.uspreventiveservicestaskforce.org.

    Test Performance of Brief Cognitive Screening Instruments (Key Question 2)

    We identified 55 fair- to good-quality diagnostic accuracy studies of brief screening instruments (29 administered in ≤5 minutes, 19 administered in 6 to 10 minutes, and 5 self-administered) conducted in primary care–relevant populations (Table 1 of the Supplement) (50–88). Forty-six studies provided the test performance for detection of dementia. These studies covered a broad range of older adults selected from the community or primary care practices. Almost all studies had a majority of female participants, but the studies varied in mean age (range, 69 to 95 years) and prevalence of dementia (range, 1.2% to 47.1%). Among trials that reported education level, included adults usually had at least some high school education.

    Only 12 brief instruments have been studied more than once in well-designed diagnostic accuracy studies that evaluated their ability to detect dementia in primary care–relevant populations: the MMSE (k = 25; n = 12 348), the Clock Drawing Test (CDT) (k = 7; n = 2509), verbal or category fluency tests (k = 6; n = 2083), the short or full Informant Questionnaire on Cognitive Decline in the Elderly (IQCODE) (k = 5; n = 1108), the Memory Impairment Screen (MIS) (MIS: k = 4; n = 1671; MIS by telephone: k = 1; n = 300), Mini-Cog (k = 4; n = 1570), the Abbreviated Mental Test (AMT) (k = 4; n = 824), the Short Portable Mental Status Questionnaire (SPMSQ) (k = 4; n = 1057), the Mental Status Questionnaire (k = 2; n = 522), the Free and Cued Selective Reminding Test (FCSRT) (k = 2; n = 734), the 7-Minute Screen (7MS) (k = 2; n = 553), and the Telephone Interview for Cognitive Status (TICS) (k = 2; n = 677) (Appendix Table 2). Only 4 studies were of good quality; the rest were of fair quality and had various risks of bias, the most common being partial verification, unclear independence of application or interpretation of screening test and reference standard, selection bias with stratified sampling or sampling of volunteers only, and unclear spectrum of patients due to poor reporting of how study population was derived or percentage of or reasons for attrition. The most common reference standards were criteria from the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Third Edition (DSM-III), the DSM-IV, or the National Institute of Neurological and Communicative Disorders and Stroke and Alzheimer's Disease and Related Disorders Association, and formal diagnosis was based on a combination of history, examination, neuropsychological testing, and expert consensus.

    Appendix Table 2. Diagnostic Accuracy of Brief Cognitive Screening Instruments in Primary Care for Dementia

    The best-studied instrument was the MMSE. Pooled estimates across 14 studies (n = 10 185) resulted in sensitivity of 88.3% (95% CI, 81.3% to 92.9%) and specificity of 86.2% (CI, 81.8% to 89.7%) for the most commonly reported cut points of 23/24 or 24/25. The CDT, Mini-Cog, MIS, SPMSQ, AMT, FCSRT, 7MS, TICS, and IQCODE can also have acceptable test performance; however, less evidence supported the use of each of these instruments and had limited reproducibility in primary care–relevant populations and unknown optimum cut points for each instrument. The CDT had a wider range of sensitivity and specificity (67% to 97.9% and 69% to 94.2%, respectively), and the optimum cut point is unclear from the body of literature we examined. The Mini-Cog probably has better sensitivity than the CDT alone (76% to 100%) but with a possible tradeoff of lower specificity (54% to 85.2%). Although the MIS can have relatively good test performance in screening for dementia (sensitivity, 43% to 86%; specificity, 93% to 97%), the sensitivities in the 2 good-quality studies (n = 948) were low (about 40%). Likewise, the AMT can have relatively good test performance in screening for dementia (sensitivity, 42% to 100%; specificity, 83% to 95.4%), but 1 fair-quality study (n = 289) had low sensitivity (42%) and no studies were done in the United States. The SPMSQ, FCSRT, 7MS, and TICS also have reasonable test performance, but this is based on a limited number of studies. The verbal fluency tests had worse performance than other instruments regardless of cut point. The IQCODE, a self-administered informant-based screening tool, had a sensitivity of 75% to 87.6% and a specificity of 65% to 91.1%. The 6-Item Screener, Visual Association Test, General Practitioner Assessment of Cognition, ADL/IADL, Benton Orientation Test, Delayed Recall Test, and Short Concord Informant Dementia Scale all had greater than 80% sensitivity and specificity to detect dementia in a single study, but their test performance has not been reproduced in other primary care–relevant populations.

    We found 27 studies designed to assess the diagnostic accuracy of 22 screening instruments to detect MCI in primary care–relevant populations (56–58, 67–69, 73, 74, 78, 83, 86–101). Only 6 instruments were examined in more than 1 study: the MMSE (k = 15; n = 6166), IQCODE (k = 4; n = 975), CDT (k = 4; n = 4191), Mini-Cog (k = 3; n = 1092), TICS (k = 3; n = 568), and Montreal Cognitive Assessment (k = 2; n = 251). Overall, the sensitivity to detect MCI for each of these instruments, except for the IQCODE, was lower than that to detect dementia (data not shown). Results for screening instruments to detect MCI are available in our full evidence report.

    Benefits and Harms of Treatment in Early Cognitive Impairment (Key Questions 4 and 5)

    We identified 1 systematic review from 2008 and 130 trials that addressed the benefit of the treatment or management of mild to moderate dementia, MCI, or both (Appendix Table 3).

    Appendix Table 3. Benefits and Harms of Interventions for Mild to Moderate Dementia and MCI

    To evaluate adverse effects of treatments with evidence of benefit, we examined the systematic review, 40 trials, and 6 open-label extensions of medication trials that reported harms and 13 observational trials designed to assess medication harms. Most trials (90%) were of fair quality. Common limitations included differences in baseline characteristics, high attrition (>20%), evidence of attrition bias, nonblinded assessment of outcomes, completers-only analyses, and limited reporting to evaluate trial conduct. Medication trials were either exclusively or partially industry-funded.

    Pharmacologic Interventions

    One well-conducted systematic review of FDA-approved medications for the treatment of AD included 39 randomized, controlled trials of acetylcholinesterase inhibitors (AChEIs) in persons with MCI or mild to moderate dementia (14). We identified an additional 9 randomized, controlled trials published since this systematic review. Overall, on the basis of 48 fair- to good-quality trials (n = 18 390) (donepezil: k = 24; n = 7552; galantamine: k = 12; n = 6008; rivastigmine: k = 12; n = 4829), AChEIs can improve cognitive function and global functioning in the short term (Appendix Table 3 and Table 2 of the Supplement) (102–149). However, the pooled magnitude of these changes is small, with a change of approximately 1 to 3 points on the ADAS-cog (Figure 2). The pooled estimate of benefit for rivastigmine is not reliable given the large statistical heterogeneity. Most available evidence comes from trials in persons with moderate AD with 6 months of follow-up. The average effect of these changes may not be clinically meaningful as defined using commonly accepted values. Only 4 trials (n = 1960) were conducted in persons with MCI (102, 115, 119, 131). Measures of global functioning were reported in 30 trials (donepezil, k = 14; galantamine, k = 7; rivastigmine, k = 9). Acetylcholinesterase inhibitors seem to consistently slow the rate of decline of global functioning by a fraction of a point in persons with AD in the short term, as measured by the CIBIC-plus. Only 1 galantamine trial reporting global functioning was conducted in persons with MCI (131). Outcome measures of global physical function were reported in only half of the trials and showed mixed results. Therefore, whether AChEIs can improve physical functioning is unclear given the inconsistent and sparsely reported findings. Six included trials and 7 open-label extension studies of included trials examined outcomes beyond 6 months. These studies generally found persistent statistically significant benefits of unknown clinical importance for commonly reported outcomes, consistent with the 6-month trial outcomes. Two trials evaluating donepezil in persons with MCI did not show any differences in conversion to AD at about 3 years. Withdrawal or discontinuation is more common with AChEIs than with placebo (Figure 3) (102, 103, 105–107, 109, 111, 112, 114, 116–130, 132–136, 138–142, 144–147, 149–159, 273–287). Discontinuation rates were 14% for donepezil and rivastigmine and 17% for galantamine. However, total serious adverse events did not seem to differ for these medications across trials with limited duration of follow-up (data not shown). Three small trials reporting zero adverse events are not reflected in these estimates (111, 112, 123). Estimates of total serious adverse events were higher in observational studies than in randomized trials. The definitions of serious adverse events were not commonly described in the included studies. Observational studies suggest that bradycardia and adverse events related to it (for example, fall or syncope) were increased with AChEIs (Table 3 of the Supplement). Memantine is currently FDA-approved for use in moderate to severe AD but has also been evaluated in persons with mild to moderate dementia or MCI. On the basis of 10 fair- to good-quality trials (n = 3015), memantine had a benefit similar to that seen with AChEIs on global cognitive functioning in persons with moderate dementia: a change of approximately 1 to 2 points on the ADAS-cog at 6 months (Appendix Table 3, Figure 2, and Table 2 of the Supplement) (150–159). Only 1 trial had longer-term follow-up, and it showed no differences in cognitive functioning between the memantine and placebo groups at 52 weeks. The effect of memantine on global functioning and physical functioning was inconsistent. Only 1 trial was done in persons with MCI, and it did not report outcome measures of global cognitive or physical function. From trial data, the percentage of persons stopping memantine therapy due to adverse effects was similar to that of placebo (Figure 3).

    Figure 2. Meta-analyses of effects of AChEIs and memantine on global cognitive function, measured by the ADAS-cog.

    Weights are from random-effects analysis. AChEI = acetylcholinesterase inhibitor; AD = Alzheimer disease; ADAS-cog = Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale-Cognitive Subscale; MCI = mild cognitive impairment; MMSE = Mini-Mental State Examination; VaD = vascular dementia.

    * Included in the systematic review by Raina and colleagues, 2008 (14).

    Figure 3. Meta-analyses of effects of AChEIs and memantine on withdrawals due to adverse events.

    Weights are from random-effects analysis. AChEI = acetylcholinesterase inhibitor; RR = relative risk.

    * Included in the systematic review by Raina and colleagues, 2008 (14).

    Twenty-six fair- to good-quality trials (n = 5325) evaluated other medications or dietary supplements (160–185), including low-dose aspirin (k = 2; n = 459), 3-hydroxy-3-methylglutaryl coenzyme A reductase inhibitors (simvastatin and atorvastatin) (k = 4; n = 1153), nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (ibuprofen, naproxen, indomethacin, and celecoxib) (k = 4; n = 959), gonadal steroids (estrogen with or without progesterone and testosterone) (k = 5; n = 295), and dietary supplements (multivitamins, B vitamins, vitamin E with or without vitamin C, and ω-3 fatty acids) (k = 12; n = 2608) (Appendix Table 3). None of the trials found a benefit for any of the medications or supplements on cognitive or physical function in persons with mild to moderate dementia or MCI (Table 4 of the Supplement).

    Caregiver Interventions

    We identified 59 trials (n = 8932) representing a wide variety of interventions that targeted the caregiver or the caregiver–patient dyad with the primary aim of improving caregiver outcomes or skills (41, 42, 186241). Most of the trials (k = 52; n = 8103) evaluated interventions with some type of psychoeducational component (that is, one that provided information about dementia or caregiving and sought to increase caregiver skills) (Appendix Table 3 and Table 5 of the Supplement). Other trials evaluated interventions that provided little or no dementia education or caregiver skill development but instead involved peer support only (k = 4; n = 644) (191, 235–237), physical activity for caregivers (k = 3; n = 293) (238–240), or an assessment and treatment plan development (k = 1; n = 50) (234).

    Most of the psychoeducational trials reported at least caregiver burden (k = 29; n = 4598) or caregiver depression (k = 34; n = 5423) outcomes. Although there were substantial clinical differences among interventions evaluated and significant statistical heterogeneity among these trials, overall there was a generally consistent finding of small benefit on caregiver burden and caregiver depression outcomes in persons caring for patients with moderate dementia. Pooled analyses of 24 trials (n = 2679) showed a small but statistically significant effect (standardized mean difference, −0.23 [CI, −0.35 to −0.12]; I2 = 52.7%) on caregiver burden (Figure 4). Most studies reported 0- to 5-point group differences on the 88-item Zarit Caregiver Burden Interview. Likewise, pooled analyses of 30 trials (n = 3537) showed a small but statistically significant effect (standardized mean difference, −0.21 [CI, −0.30 to −0.13]; I2 = 34.1%) on caregiver depression (Figure 5). Most trials reported an approximate 2- to 5-point difference between groups on the 60-point Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale. The clinical meaning of these changes in caregiver burden and depression was, on average, probably small at best. Our ability to interpret the clinical importance and consistency of findings for other self-reported caregiver outcomes (for example, global stress or distress, anxiety, health-related quality of life [HRQL], or self-reported health status) and institutionalization was limited by sparse reporting of these outcomes. Only 1 of the included trials mentioned harms, and it found no adverse events in either group.

    Figure 4. Meta-analyses of effects of psychoeducational caregiver interventions on caregiver burden.

    Weights are from random-effects analysis. REACH = Resources for Enhancing Alzheimer's Caregiver Health.

    Figure 5. Meta-analyses of effects of psychoeducational caregiver interventions on caregiver depression.

    Weights are from random-effects analysis. REACH = Resources for Enhancing Alzheimer's Caregiver Health.

    Nonpharmacologic Interventions Aimed at the Patient

    We identified 32 trials (n = 4668) that evaluated nonpharmacologic interventions that targeted the patient rather than the caregiver or patient–caregiver dyad (104, 242–272). These included cognitive training, rehabilitation, or stimulation with or without motor skills training (k = 15; n = 1128); exercise interventions (k = 10; n = 1033); multidisciplinary care interventions involving assessment and care coordination (k = 5; n = 1766); and education-only intervention (k = 2; n = 741) (Appendix Table 3 and Table 6 of the Supplement). Although findings were inconsistent across 15 cognitive intervention trials, cognitive stimulation with or without cognitive training (k = 6; n = 513) seemed to improve global cognitive function at 6 to 12 months for persons with MCI or dementia (Appendix Table 3 ). A meta-analysis of these trials showed a moderate standardized effect size for global cognitive functioning favoring the intervention (−0.59 [CI, −0.93 to −0.25]; I2 = 52.7%). The 3 trials that included cognitive stimulation reported a wide range of differences in means, with a range of approximately 0 to 13 points on the ADAS-cog between the intervention and control groups (104, 243, 296). The 2 trials that used the MMSE differed by approximately 1 point between groups (244, 250). However, the limited number of trials, the clinical and statistical heterogeneity, and the wide CIs (ranging from not clinically meaningful to a large effect) limited our ability to determine the consistency of this benefit. Other important outcomes (for example, physical function, HRQL, and symptoms) were sparsely reported. None of the included trials reported harms. We did not identify any additional studies that explicitly evaluated harms of cognitive interventions.

    Ten mostly fair-quality exercise trials showed no consistent benefit on cognitive outcomes and no benefit on patient depression outcomes (Appendix Table 3 and Table 6 of the Supplement). Other self-reported outcomes (for example, physical function and HRQL) and institutionalization were not commonly reported. Two trials of a multicomponent self-guided exercise intervention (n = 220) in persons with MCI found a small benefit in global cognitive function (approximately 1 point on the MMSE or ADAS-cog) at 12 to 18 months (258, 261). Although there was evidence of a benefit in a few of the better-conducted trials, we were unable to determine whether there is a clinically important benefit for exercise interventions on reported outcomes because of the limited number of trials and clinical heterogeneity of the populations, exercise interventions, and reported outcomes. We found no evidence of increased total or serious adverse effects due to exercise interventions among trial participants (258–260, 264).

    Five trials evaluating different multidisciplinary care interventions found no benefit in cognitive or physical function, HRQL, or institutionalization (Table 6 of the Supplement). Two trials evaluating educational interventions aimed at residential care staff or clinicians caring for persons with dementia showed no benefits in reported outcomes (Table 6 of the Supplement).

    Discussion

    Despite a large body of well-conducted diagnostic accuracy studies, only a handful of instruments have been studied in more than 1 study applicable to primary care. Although the MMSE is the best-studied instrument, it has the longest administration time and is not available for public use without cost. Other publicly available instruments that have been studied in primary care–relevant populations can have adequate test performance, including the CDT, Mini-Cog, MIS, AMT, SPMSQ, FCSRT, 7MS, and IQCODE. However, the AMT, SPMSQ, FCSRT, and 7MS have limited evidence, and each has been studied only once in English. Although other instruments seem to have adequate test performance (such as the 6-Item Screener, Visual Association Test, General Practitioner Assessment of Cognition, ADL/IADL, Benton Orientation Test, Delayed Recall Test, and Short Concord Informant Dementia Scale), each of them has been studied only once in primary care–relevant populations. Our review of the diagnostic accuracy of screening for dementia includes twice the number of studies in existing reviews but is generally consistent with the findings of others (3, 69, 297, 298).

    We found no studies to substantiate or refute concerns about harms of screening. Although screening and the subsequent diagnostic work-up for abnormal results are noninvasive, false-positive results could represent a harm if patients or clinicians do not follow through with subsequent diagnostic testing and falsely assign a diagnosis of dementia. If false-positive results are a concern, instruments or cut points with high specificity should be given preference. Potential harms from false-negative results, if they are of concern, can be minimized with repeated screening.

    Although screening for cognitive impairment can identify persons with dementia, there is no empirical evidence on whether interventions affect clinician, patient, or family decision making. Caregiver interventions and FDA-approved medications for AD show a small benefit for patients and caregivers, although the clinical importance of this benefit is unclear, especially in persons with screen-detected cognitive impairment or those with MCI or mild dementia. Acetylcholinesterase inhibitors and memantine can improve global cognitive function, and AChEIs can improve short-term global function for patients with moderate AD. The average effects of changes in cognitive functioning observed in trials are small, and the clinical importance of population benefits is probably negligible when commonly accepted thresholds are used. This small benefit of AChEIs must be balanced by the common adverse effects. Because of resource limitations, we did not search the FDA Web site or contact industry for unpublished data. A review of trial registry data suggested that 2 trials in persons with MCI (ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT00236574 and NCT00236431) were stopped early because of interim analyses suggesting increased mortality in persons receiving galantamine compared with those receiving placebo. Our review's findings are consistent with those of other similar systematic reviews and guidelines (14, 299, 300).

    Likewise, complex interventions aimed at caregivers and dyads can reduce caregiver burden and depression, but the average effects in these trials were small. Only half of the trials of caregiver interventions were conducted in the United States, and availability of these complex interventions in the United States is limited. Our review is generally consistent with existing systematic reviews except for slight differences in the magnitude of effect on caregiver outcomes due to differences in included trials and definitions of outcomes (301–305).

    Other interventions (for example, cognitive stimulation or exercise) have limited evidence to support use in persons with MCI or mild to moderate dementia. Although our review's findings are promising, the certainty and magnitude of effect of cognitive stimulation in persons with mild to moderate dementia or MCI are still unclear. Findings from existing systematic reviews evaluating cognitive interventions were generally consistent with those of our review (306–308), although 1 comprehensive Cochrane review that included persons with any stage of dementia and institutionalized individuals found more consistent and precise findings of benefit on cognitive function (306). Although no consistent benefit was observed for exercise interventions, 3 of the better-conducted trials suggested a benefit in global cognitive function or physical functioning and HRQL, consistent with another existing systematic review's findings in noninstitutionalized older adults with dementia (309).

    Because of this narrow scope, our review does not address several important aspects of screening test performance, including the psychometric properties of testing other than sensitivity and specificity, the validation of screening instruments in different languages, the optimum cut points in scoring the included instruments, the differential ability of instruments to detect different types of dementia, the comparative performance of screening instruments, and the ability to improve diagnostic performance by combining screening instruments. Our review of treatments focuses only on the benefits and harms in a subset of persons with mild to moderate dementia or MCI and does not address the comparative effectiveness of different types of interventions or the minimum necessary components for the effectiveness of complex interventions.

    Expert consensus guidelines state that early detection of cognitive decline may be beneficial because clinicians can optimize medical management, offer relief based on better understanding of symptoms, maximize decision-making autonomy and planning for the future, and offer appropriate access to services that will ultimately improve patient outcomes and reduce future costs (310). Although this is a logical argument, there is little or no empirical evidence to support it. How and whether clinician decision making and patient and family decision making are affected by earlier identification of cognitive impairment or earlier management of patients with dementia and their caregivers are important aspects of management of this rapidly growing health care problem. Important patient outcomes, such as global functioning, HRQL, global physical functioning, emergent or unexpected health care utilization, and institutionalizations, are inconsistently reported but crucial to understanding the true balance of benefits and harms for patients and caregivers, especially in light of small, clinically uncertain benefits seen on continuous measures of cognitive function or caregiver burden.

    On the basis of empirical evidence, how best to apply brief cognitive assessment tools to aid in the identification of dementia (population-based screening vs. more targeted approaches suggested by Medicare's Annual Wellness Visit) is still unclear. To operationalize the Annual Wellness Visit's mandate to assess for cognitive impairment, experts have suggested a stepwise approach to identifying persons to whom a brief cognitive instrument should be applied. Research comparing which criteria (for example, age, comorbid conditions, or functional status) should lead primary care clinicians to perform cognitive assessment is much needed. Additional evaluation of brief instruments in more representative populations is needed after initial validation studies to establish reproducibility and to understand population and scoring differences that may lead to important variation in test performance. The harms of screening are poorly studied. Some have argued that these harms are minimal, whereas others contend that the harms of screening and mislabeling persons with dementia are real given the variation in practice of diagnostic confirmation of disease. If broader adoption of screening for cognitive impairment is implemented, it would be wise to better understand these tradeoffs.

    Clinical research around defining, diagnosing, and treating cognitive impairment before the loss of independence with IADLs is rapidly evolving. Experts in this field are working to refine diagnostic criteria and to standardize the identification of persons with MCI or “mild neurocognitive disorder,” as it is called in the DSM-V. Future research should focus on improved criteria and subtypes of MCI with demonstrated prognostic and predictive value. Criteria with established predictive value should then be operationalized in a standardized fashion in research studies.

    Although it is clear that brief instruments to screen for cognitive impairment can adequately detect dementia, there is no empirical evidence that screening for or early diagnosis of cognitive impairment improves decision-making or important patient, caregiver, or societal outcomes. Despite a large body of evidence spanning decades of research, it is still unclear whether FDA-approved medications, caregiver interventions, cognitive interventions, or exercise interventions in persons with earlier detected cognitive impairment have a clinically significant effect. How best to identify persons with cognitive impairment and understanding how and whether early identification affects important decision making is much needed to address this common, growing, and costly health condition.

    References

    • 1. American Psychiatric AssociationDiagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders. 4th ed. Washington, DC American Psychiatric Association 1994. Google Scholar
    • 2. Plassman BLLanga KMFisher GGHeeringa SGWeir DROfstedal MBet alPrevalence of dementia in the United States: the aging, demographics, and memory study. Neuroepidemiology2007;29:125-32. [PMID: 17975326] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 3. Holsinger TDeveau JBoustani M, and Williams JWDoes this patient have dementia? JAMA2007;297:2391-404. [PMID: 17551132] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 4. Querfurth HW and LaFerla FMAlzheimer's disease. N Engl J Med2010;362:329-44. [PMID: 20107219] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 5. Ganguli MRodriguez EMulsant BRichards SPandav RBilt JVet alDetection and management of cognitive impairment in primary care: The Steel Valley Seniors Survey. J Am Geriatr Soc2004;52:1668-75. [PMID: 15450043] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 6. Valcour VGMasaki KHCurb JD, and Blanchette PLThe detection of dementia in the primary care setting. Arch Intern Med2000;160:2964-8. [PMID: 11041904] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 7. Olafsdóttir MSkoog I, and Marcusson JDetection of dementia in primary care: the Linköping study. Dement Geriatr Cogn Disord2000;11:223-9. [PMID: 10867449] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 8. Chodosh JPetitti DBElliott MHays RDCrooks VCReuben DBet alPhysician recognition of cognitive impairment: evaluating the need for improvement. J Am Geriatr Soc2004;52:1051-9. [PMID: 15209641] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 9. Mitchell AJThe clinical significance of subjective memory complaints in the diagnosis of mild cognitive impairment and dementia: a meta-analysis. Int J Geriatr Psychiatry2008;23:1191-202. [PMID: 18500688] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 10. Plassman BLWilliams JWBurke JRHolsinger T, and Benjamin SSystematic review: factors associated with risk for and possible prevention of cognitive decline in later life. Ann Intern Med2010;153:182-93 LinkGoogle Scholar
    • 11. U.S. Preventive Services Task ForceScreening for dementia: recommendations and rationale. Am J Nurs2003;103:87, 89, 91, 93, 95. [PMID: 14501480] MedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 12. McGuinness BO'Hare JCraig DBullock RMalouf R, and Passmore PStatins for the treatment of dementia. Cochrane Database Syst Rev2010;:CD007514. [PMID: 20687089] MedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 13. Williams PSRands GOrrel M, and Spector AAspirin for vascular dementia. Cochrane Database Syst Rev2000;:CD001296. [PMID: 11034710] MedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 14. Raina PSantaguida PIsmaila APatterson CCowan DLevine Met alEffectiveness of cholinesterase inhibitors and memantine for treating dementia: evidence review for a clinical practice guideline. Ann Intern Med2008;148:379-97 LinkGoogle Scholar
    • 15. Malouf R and Grimley Evans JThe effect of vitamin B6 on cognition. Cochrane Database Syst Rev2003;:CD004393. [PMID: 14584010] MedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 16. Malouf R and Areosa Sastre AVitamin B12 for cognition. Cochrane Database Syst Rev2003;:CD004326. [PMID: 12918012] MedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 17. Malouf R and Grimley Evans JFolic acid with or without vitamin B12 for the prevention and treatment of healthy elderly and demented people. Cochrane Database Syst Rev2008;:CD004514. [PMID: 18843658] MedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 18. Balk EChung MRaman GTatsioni AChew PIp Set alB vitamins and berries and age-related neurodegenerative disorders. Evid Rep Technol Assess (Full Rep)2006;:1-161. [PMID: 17628125] MedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 19. Jia XMcNeill G, and Avenell ADoes taking vitamin, mineral and fatty acid supplements prevent cognitive decline? A systematic review of randomized controlled trials. J Hum Nutr Diet2008;21:317-36. [PMID: 18721399] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 20. Issa AMMojica WAMorton SCTraina SNewberry SJHilton LGet alThe efficacy of omega-3 fatty acids on cognitive function in aging and dementia: a systematic review. Dement Geriatr Cogn Disord2006;21:88-96. [PMID: 16340205] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 21. van Uffelen JGChin APaw MJHopman-Rock M, and van Mechelen WThe effects of exercise on cognition in older adults with and without cognitive decline: a systematic review. Clin J Sport Med2008;18:486-500. [PMID: 19001882] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 22. Forbes DForbes SMorgan DGMarkle-Reid MWood J, and Culum IPhysical activity programs for persons with dementia. Cochrane Database Syst Rev2008;:CD006489. [PMID: 18646158] MedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 23. Ransohoff DF and Feinstein ARProblems of spectrum and bias in evaluating the efficacy of diagnostic tests. N Engl J Med1978;299:926-30. [PMID: 692598] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 24. Lijmer JGMol BWHeisterkamp SBonsel GJPrins MHvan der Meulen JHet alEmpirical evidence of design-related bias in studies of diagnostic tests. JAMA1999;282:1061-6. [PMID: 10493205] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 25. Whiting PRutjes AWReitsma JBGlas ASBossuyt PM, and Kleijnen JSources of variation and bias in studies of diagnostic accuracy: a systematic review. Ann Intern Med2004;140:189-202 LinkGoogle Scholar
    • 26. Rutjes AWReitsma JBDi Nisio MSmidt Nvan Rijn JC, and Bossuyt PMEvidence of bias and variation in diagnostic accuracy studies. CMAJ2006;174:469-76. [PMID: 16477057] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 27. Leeflang MMBossuyt PM, and Irwig LDiagnostic test accuracy may vary with prevalence: implications for evidence-based diagnosis. J Clin Epidemiol2009;62:5-12. [PMID: 18778913] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 28. U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. Procedure Manual. AHRQ publication no. 08-05118-EF. Rockville, MD: U.S. Preventive Services Task Force; 2008. Accessed at www.uspreventiveservicestaskforce.org/uspstf08/methods/procmanual.htm on 22 January 2010. Google Scholar
    • 29. National Institute for Health and Clinical ExcellenceThe Guidelines Manual. London National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence 2006. Google Scholar
    • 30. Shea BJGrimshaw JMWells GABoers MAndersson NHamel Cet alDevelopment of AMSTAR: a measurement tool to assess the methodological quality of systematic reviews. BMC Med Res Methodol2007;7:10. [PMID: 17302989] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 31. Wells GA, Shea B, O'Connell D, Peterson J, Welch V, Losos M, et al. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) for assessing the quality of nonrandomised studies in meta-analyses. Ottawa, Ontario, Canada: Ottawa Hospital Research Institute; 2013. Accessed at www.ohri.ca/programs/clinical_epidemiology/oxford.asp on 1 April 2013. Google Scholar
    • 32. Whiting PRutjes AWReitsma JBBossuyt PM, and Kleijnen JThe development of QUADAS: a tool for the quality assessment of studies of diagnostic accuracy included in systematic reviews. BMC Med Res Methodol2003;3:25. [PMID: 14606960] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 33. Bradburn MJDeeks JJ, and Altman DGmetan—a command for meta-analysis in Stata.. In: Sterne JAC, eds. Meta-Analysis in Stata: An Updated Collection from the Stata Journal. College Station, TX Stata Pr 1998 3-28. Google Scholar
    • 34. Rosen WGMohs RC, and Davis KLA new rating scale for Alzheimer's disease. Am J Psychiatry1984;141:1356-64. [PMID: 6496779] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 35. Schneider LSOlin JTDoody RSClark CMMorris JCReisberg Bet alValidity and reliability of the Alzheimer's Disease Cooperative Study-Clinical Global Impression of Change. The Alzheimer's Disease Cooperative Study. Alzheimer Dis Assoc Disord1997;11: S22-32. [PMID: 9236949] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 36. Katz SDowns TDCash HR, and Grotz RCProgress in development of the index of ADL. Gerontologist1970;10:20-30. [PMID: 5420677] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 37. Lawton MP and Brody EMAssessment of older people: self-maintaining and instrumental activities of daily living. Gerontologist1969;9:179-86. [PMID: 5349366] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 38. Zarit SHReever KE, and Bach-Peterson JRelatives of the impaired elderly: correlates of feelings of burden. Gerontologist1980;20:649-55. [PMID: 7203086] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 39. Radloff LSThe CES-D Scale: A self-report depression scale for research in the general population. Appl Psychol Meas1977;1:385-401. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
    • 40. Borenstein MHedges LVHiggins JPT, and Rothstein HRIntroduction to Meta-analysis. 1st ed. West Sussex, United Kingdom J Wiley 2009. Google Scholar
    • 41. Teri LMcCurry SMLogsdon R, and Gibbons LETraining community consultants to help family members improve dementia care: a randomized controlled trial. Gerontologist2005;45:802-11. [PMID: 16326662] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 42. Hepburn KWLewis MNarayan SCenter BTornatore JBremer KLet alPartners in caregiving: a psychoeducation program affecting dementia family caregivers' distress and caregiving outlook. Clin Gerontol2005;29:53-69. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
    • 43. Qaseem ASnow VCross JTForciea MAHopkins RShekelle Pet alAmerican College of PhysiciansAmerican Academy of Family Physicians Panel on DementiaCurrent pharmacologic treatment of dementia: a clinical practice guideline from the American College of Physicians and the American Academy of Family Physicians. Ann Intern Med2008;148:370-8 LinkGoogle Scholar
    • 44. Cohen JStatistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences. 2nd ed. Hillsdale, NJ Lawrence Earlbaum Associates 1988. Google Scholar
    • 45. Higgins JP and Thompson SGQuantifying heterogeneity in a meta-analysis. Stat Med2002;21:1539-58. [PMID: 12111919] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 46. Sterne JAC and Harbord RMFunnel plots in meta-analysis. In: Sterne JAC, ed. Meta-Analysis in Stata: An Updated Collection from the Stata Journal. College Station, TX Stata Pr 2009 109-23. Google Scholar
    • 47. Steichen TJNonparametric trim and fill analysis of publication bias in meta-analysis. In: Sterne JAC, ed. Meta-Analysis in Stata: An Updated Collection from the Stata Journal. College Station, TX Stata Pr 2009 165-77. Google Scholar
    • 48. Boustani MCallahan CMUnverzagt FWAustrom MGPerkins AJFultz BAet alImplementing a screening and diagnosis program for dementia in primary care. J Gen Intern Med2005;20:572-7. [PMID: 16050849] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 49. Boustani MPerkins AJFox CUnverzagt FAustrom MGFultz Bet alWho refuses the diagnostic assessment for dementia in primary care? Int J Geriatr Psychiatry2006;21:556-63. [PMID: 16783796] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 50. Fuchs AWiese BAltiner AWollny A, and Pentzek MCued recall and other cognitive tasks to facilitate dementia recognition in primary care. J Am Geriatr Soc2012;60:130-5. [PMID: 22150245] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 51. Kirby MDenihan ABruce ICoakley D, and Lawlor BAThe clock drawing test in primary care: sensitivity in dementia detection and specificity against normal and depressed elderly. Int J Geriatr Psychiatry2001;16:935-40. [PMID: 11607936] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 52. Ball LJOgden AMandi D, and Birge SJThe validation of a mailed health survey for screening of dementia of the Alzheimer's type. J Am Geriatr Soc2001;49:798-802. [PMID: 11454121] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 53. del Ser TSánchez-Sánchez FGarcía de Yébenes MJOtero A, and Munoz DGValidation of the seven-minute screen neurocognitive battery for the diagnosis of dementia in a Spanish population-based sample. Dement Geriatr Cogn Disord2006;22:454-64. [PMID: 16988506] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 54. Grober EHall CMcGinn MNicholls TStanford SEhrlich Aet alNeuropsychological strategies for detecting early dementia. J Int Neuropsychol Soc2008;14:130-42. [PMID: 18078539] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 55. Wolf-Klein GPSilverstone FALevy AP, and Brod MSScreening for Alzheimer's disease by clock drawing. J Am Geriatr Soc1989;37:730-4. [PMID: 2754158] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 56. Holsinger TPlassman BLStechuchak KMBurke JRCoffman CJ, and Williams JWScreening for cognitive impairment: comparing the performance of four instruments in primary care. J Am Geriatr Soc2012;60:1027-36. [PMID: 22646750] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 57. Kaufer DIWilliams CSBraaten AJGill KZimmerman S, and Sloane PDCognitive screening for dementia and mild cognitive impairment in assisted living: comparison of 3 tests. J Am Med Dir Assoc2008;9:586-93. [PMID: 19083293] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 58. Borson SScanlan JMWatanabe JTu SP, and Lessig MImproving identification of cognitive impairment in primary care. Int J Geriatr Psychiatry2006;21:349-55. [PMID: 16534774] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 59. Lipton RBKatz MJKuslansky GSliwinski MJStewart WFVerghese Jet alScreening for dementia by telephone using the memory impairment screen. J Am Geriatr Soc2003;51:1382-90. [PMID: 14511157] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 60. Buschke HKuslansky GKatz MStewart WFSliwinski MJEckholdt HMet alScreening for dementia with the memory impairment screen. Neurology1999;52:231-8. [PMID: 9932936] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 61. Kuslansky GBuschke HKatz MSliwinski M, and Lipton RBScreening for Alzheimer's disease: the memory impairment screen versus the conventional three-word memory test. J Am Geriatr Soc2002;50:1086-91. [PMID: 12110070] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 62. Fillenbaum GHeyman AWilliams KProsnitz B, and Burchett BSensitivity and specificity of standardized screens of cognitive impairment and dementia among elderly black and white community residents. J Clin Epidemiol1990;43:651-60. [PMID: 2370572] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 63. Hooijer CDinkgreve MJonker CLindeboom J, and Kay DWKShort screening tests for dementia in the elderly population. I. A comparison between AMTS, MMSE, MSQ and SPMSQ. Int J Geriatr Psychiatry1992;7:559-71. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
    • 64. Erkinjuntti TSulkava RWikström J, and Autio LShort Portable Mental Status Questionnaire as a screening test for dementia and delirium among the elderly. J Am Geriatr Soc1987;35:412-6. [PMID: 3571790] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 65. Heun RPapassotiropoulos A, and Jennssen FThe validity of psychometric instruments for detection of dementia in the elderly general population. Int J Geriatr Psychiatry1998;13:368-80. [PMID: 9658272] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 66. Brodaty HPond DKemp NMLuscombe GHarding LBerman Ket alThe GPCOG: a new screening test for dementia designed for general practice. J Am Geriatr Soc2002;50:530-4. [PMID: 11943052] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 67. Callahan CMUnverzagt FWHui SLPerkins AJ, and Hendrie HCSix-item screener to identify cognitive impairment among potential subjects for clinical research. Med Care2002;40:771-81. [PMID: 12218768] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 68. Cruz-Orduña IBellón JMTorrero PAparicio ESanz AMula Net alDetecting MCI and dementia in primary care: efficiency of the MMS, the FAQ and the IQCODE. Fam Pract2012;29:401-6. [PMID: 22121012] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 69. Cullen BFahy SCunningham CJCoen RFBruce IGreene Eet alScreening for dementia in an Irish community sample using MMSE: a comparison of norm-adjusted versus fixed cut-points. Int J Geriatr Psychiatry2005;20:371-6. [PMID: 15799072] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 70. Fong TGJones RNRudolph JLYang FMTommet DHabtemariam Det alDevelopment and validation of a brief cognitive assessment tool: the sweet 16. Arch Intern Med2011;171:432-7. [PMID: 21059967] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 71. Gagnon MLetenneur LDartigues JFCommenges DOrgogozo JMBarberger-Gateau Pet alValidity of the Mini-Mental State examination as a screening instrument for cognitive impairment and dementia in French elderly community residents. Neuroepidemiology1990;9:143-50. [PMID: 2402325] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 72. Grut MFratiglioni LViitanen M, and Winblad BAccuracy of the Mini-Mental Status Examination as a screening test for dementia in a Swedish elderly population. Acta Neurol Scand1993;87:312-7. [PMID: 8503262] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 73. Jeong SKCho KH, and Kim JMThe usefulness of the Korean version of modified Mini-Mental State Examination (K-mMMSE) for dementia screening in community dwelling elderly people. BMC Public Health2004;4:31. [PMID: 15283869] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 74. Jorm AFBroe GACreasy HSulway MRDent OFairley MJet alFurther data on the validity of the Informant Questionnaire on Cognitive Decline in the Elderly (IQCODE). Int J Geriatr Psychiatry1996;11:131-9. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
    • 75. Kahle-Wrobleski KCorrada MMLi B, and Kawas CHSensitivity and specificity of the mini-mental state examination for identifying dementia in the oldest-old: the 90+ study. J Am Geriatr Soc2007;55:284-9. [PMID: 17302668] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 76. Kay DWHenderson ASScott RWilson JRickwood D, and Grayson DADementia and depression among the elderly living in the Hobart community: the effect of the diagnostic criteria on the prevalence rates. Psychol Med1985;15:771-88. [PMID: 4080881] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 77. Lavery LLLu SYChang CCSaxton J, and Ganguli MCognitive assessment of older primary care patients with and without memory complaints. J Gen Intern Med2007;22:949-54. [PMID: 17453265] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 78. McDowell IKristjansson BHill GB, and Hébert RCommunity screening for dementia: the Mini Mental State Exam (MMSE) and Modified Mini-Mental State Exam (3MS) compared. J Clin Epidemiol1997;50:377-83. [PMID: 9179095] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 79. Morales JMBermejo FRomero M, and Del-Ser TScreening of dementia in community-dwelling elderly through informant report. Int J Geriatr Psychiatry1997;12:808-16. [PMID: 9283925] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 80. Rait GMorley MBurns ABaldwin RChew-Graham C, and St Leger ASScreening for cognitive impairment in older African-Caribbeans. Psychol Med2000;30:957-63. [PMID: 11037103] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 81. Rait GBurns ABaldwin RMorley MChew-Graham C, and St Leger ASValidating screening instruments for cognitive impairment in older South Asians in the United Kingdom. Int J Geriatr Psychiatry2000;15:54-62. [PMID: 10637405] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 82. Reischies FM and Geiselmann BAge-related cognitive decline and vision impairment affecting the detection of dementia syndrome in old age. Br J Psychiatry1997;171:449-51. [PMID: 9463604] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 83. Scharre DWChang SIMurden RALamb JBeversdorf DQKataki Met alSelf-administered Gerocognitive Examination (SAGE): a brief cognitive assessment Instrument for mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and early dementia. Alzheimer Dis Assoc Disord2010;24:64-71. [PMID: 20220323] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 84. Waite LMBroe GACasey BBennett HPJorm AFCreasey Het alScreening for dementia using an informant interview. Neuropsychol Dev Cogn B Aging Neuropsychol Cogn1998;5:194-202. CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 85. Solomon PRBrush MCalvo VAdams FDeVeaux RDPendlebury WWet alIdentifying dementia in the primary care practice. Int Psychogeriatr2000;12:483-93. [PMID: 11263715] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 86. Manly JJSchupf NStern YBrickman AMTang MX, and Mayeux RTelephone-based identification of mild cognitive impairment and dementia in a multicultural cohort. Arch Neurol2011;68:607-14. [PMID: 21555635] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 87. Tokuhara KGValcour VGMasaki KH, and Blanchette PLUtility of the Informant Questionnaire on Cognitive Decline in the Elderly (IQCODE) for dementia in a Japanese-American population. Hawaii Med J2006;65:72-5. [PMID: 16724448] MedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 88. Lam LCTam CWLui VWChan WCChan SSChiu HFet alScreening of mild cognitive impairment in Chinese older adults—a multistage validation of the Chinese abbreviated mild cognitive impairment test. Neuroepidemiology2008;30:6-12. [PMID: 18204291] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 89. Donnelly KDonnelly JP, and Cory EPrimary care screening for cognitive impairment in elderly veterans. Am J Alzheimers Dis Other Demen2008;23:218-26. [PMID: 18375531] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 90. Ehreke LLuppa MLuck TWiese BWeyerer SEifflaender-Gorfer Set alAgeCoDe groupIs the clock drawing test appropriate for screening for mild cognitive impairment?—Results of the German study on Ageing, Cognition and Dementia in Primary Care Patients (AgeCoDe). Dement Geriatr Cogn Disord2009;28:365-72. [PMID: 19887799] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 91. Ehreke LLuck TLuppa MKönig HHVillringer A, and Riedel-Heller SGClock drawing test - screening utility for mild cognitive impairment according to different scoring systems: results of the Leipzig Longitudinal Study of the Aged (LEILA 75+). Int Psychogeriatr2011;23:1592-601. [PMID: 21813037] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 92. Lee KSKim EAHong CHLee DWOh BH, and Cheong HKClock drawing test in mild cognitive impairment: quantitative analysis of four scoring methods and qualitative analysis. Dement Geriatr Cogn Disord2008;26:483-9. [PMID: 18987468] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 93. Cook SEMarsiske M, and McCoy KJThe use of the Modified Telephone Interview for Cognitive Status (TICS-M) in the detection of amnestic mild cognitive impairment. J Geriatr Psychiatry Neurol2009;22:103-9. [PMID: 19417219] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 94. Vercambre MNCuvelier HGayon YAHardy-Léger IBerr CTrivalle Cet alValidation study of a French version of the modified telephone interview for cognitive status (F-TICS-m) in elderly women. Int J Geriatr Psychiatry2010;25:1142-9. [PMID: 20054838] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 95. Rideaux TBeaudreau SAFernandez S, and O'Hara RUtility of the abbreviated Fuld Object Memory Evaluation and MMSE for detection of dementia and cognitive impairment not dementia in diverse ethnic groups. J Alzheimers Dis2012;31:371-86. [PMID: 22555374] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 96. Saxton JMorrow LEschman AArcher GLuther J, and Zuccolotto AComputer assessment of mild cognitive impairment. Postgrad Med2009;121:177-85. [PMID: 19332976] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 97. Tariq SHTumosa NChibnall JTPerry MH, and Morley JEComparison of the Saint Louis University mental status examination and the mini-mental state examination for detecting dementia and mild neurocognitive disorder—a pilot study. Am J Geriatr Psychiatry2006;14:900-10. [PMID: 17068312] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 98. Lee JYLee DWCho SJNa DLJeon HJKim SKet alBrief screening for mild cognitive impairment in elderly outpatient clinic: validation of the Korean version of the Montreal Cognitive Assessment. J Geriatr Psychiatry Neurol2008;21:104-10. [PMID: 18474719] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 99. Markwick AZamboni G, and de Jager CAProfiles of cognitive subtest impairment in the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) in a research cohort with normal Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) scores. J Clin Exp Neuropsychol2012;34:750-7. [PMID: 22468719] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 100. Ayalon LThe IQCODE versus a single-item informant measure to discriminate between cognitively intact individuals and individuals with dementia or cognitive impairment. J Geriatr Psychiatry Neurol2011;24:168-73. [PMID: 21856971] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 101. Li MNg TPKua EH, and Ko SMBrief informant screening test for mild cognitive impairment and early Alzheimer's disease. Dement Geriatr Cogn Disord2006;21:392-402. [PMID: 16645272] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 102. Doody RSFerris SHSalloway SSun YGoldman RWatkins WEet alDonepezil treatment of patients with MCI: a 48-week randomized, placebo-controlled trial. Neurology2009;72:1555-61. [PMID: 19176895] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 103. Mori EIkeda M, and Kosaka KDonepezil-DLB Study InvestigatorsDonepezil for dementia with Lewy bodies: a randomized, placebo-controlled trial. Ann Neurol2012;72:41-52. [PMID: 22829268] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 104. Requena CLópez Ibor MIMaestú FCampo PLópez Ibor JJ, and Ortiz TEffects of cholinergic drugs and cognitive training on dementia. Dement Geriatr Cogn Disord2004;18:50-4. [PMID: 15084794] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 105. Black SRomán GCGeldmacher DSSalloway SHecker JBurns Aet alDonepezil 307 Vascular Dementia Study GroupEfficacy and tolerability of donepezil in vascular dementia: positive results of a 24-week, multicenter, international, randomized, placebo-controlled clinical trial. Stroke2003;34:2323-30. [PMID: 12970516] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 106. Burns ARossor MHecker JGauthier SPetit HMöller HJet alThe effects of donepezil in Alzheimer's disease - results from a multinational trial. Dement Geriatr Cogn Disord1999;10:237-44. [PMID: 10325453] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 107. Courtney CFarrell DGray RHills RLynch LSellwood Eet alAD2000 Collaborative GroupLong-term donepezil treatment in 565 patients with Alzheimer's disease (AD2000): randomised double-blind trial. Lancet2004;363:2105-15. [PMID: 15220031] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 108. dos Santos Moraes WPoyares DRGuilleminault CRamos LRBertolucci PH, and Tufik SThe effect of donepezil on sleep and REM sleep EEG in patients with Alzheimer disease: a double-blind placebo-controlled study. Sleep2006;29:199-205. [PMID: 16494088] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 109. Feldman HGauthier SHecker JVellas BSubbiah P, and Whalen EDonepezil MSAD Study Investigators GroupA 24-week, randomized, double-blind study of donepezil in moderate to severe Alzheimer's disease. Neurology2001;57:613-20. [PMID: 11524468] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 110. Holmes CWilkinson DDean CVethanayagam SOlivieri SLangley Aet alThe efficacy of donepezil in the treatment of neuropsychiatric symptoms in Alzheimer disease. Neurology2004;63:214-9. [PMID: 15277611] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 111. Kemp PMHolmes CHoffmann SWilkinson SZivanovic MThom Jet alA randomised placebo controlled study to assess the effects of cholinergic treatment on muscarinic receptors in Alzheimer's disease. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry2003;74:1567-70. [PMID: 14617718] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 112. Krishnan KRCharles HCDoraiswamy PMMintzer JWeisler RYu Xet alRandomized, placebo-controlled trial of the effects of donepezil on neuronal markers and hippocampal volumes in Alzheimer's disease. Am J Psychiatry2003;160:2003-11. [PMID: 14594748] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 113. Mazza MCapuano ABria P, and Mazza SGinkgo biloba and donepezil: a comparison in the treatment of Alzheimer's dementia in a randomized placebo-controlled double-blind study. Eur J Neurol2006;13:981-5. [PMID: 16930364] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 114. Mohs RCDoody RSMorris JCIeni JRRogers SLPerdomo CAet al“312” Study GroupA 1-year, placebo-controlled preservation of function survival study of donepezil in AD patients. Neurology2001;57:481-8. [PMID: 11502917] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 115. Petersen RCThomas RGGrundman MBennett DDoody RFerris Set alAlzheimer's Disease Cooperative Study GroupVitamin E and donepezil for the treatment of mild cognitive impairment. N Engl J Med2005;352:2379-88. [PMID: 15829527] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 116. Rogers SL and Friedhoff LTThe efficacy and safety of donepezil in patients with Alzheimer's disease: results of a US Multicentre, Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Trial. The Donepezil Study Group. Dementia1996;7:293-303. [PMID: 8915035] MedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 117. Rogers SLDoody RSMohs RC, and Friedhoff LTDonepezil improves cognition and global function in Alzheimer disease: a 15-week, double-blind, placebo-controlled study. Donepezil Study Group. Arch Intern Med1998;158:1021-31. [PMID: 9588436] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 118. Rogers SLFarlow MRDoody RSMohs R, and Friedhoff LTA 24-week, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of donepezil in patients with Alzheimer's disease. Donepezil Study Group. Neurology1998;50:136-45. [PMID: 9443470] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 119. Salloway SFerris SKluger AGoldman RGriesing TKumar Det alDonepezil 401 Study GroupEfficacy of donepezil in mild cognitive impairment: a randomized placebo-controlled trial. Neurology2004;63:651-7. [PMID: 15326237] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 120. Seltzer BZolnouni PNunez MGoldman RKumar DIeni Jet alDonepezil “402” Study GroupEfficacy of donepezil in early-stage Alzheimer disease: a randomized placebo-controlled trial. Arch Neurol2004;61:1852-6. [PMID: 15596605] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 121. Tariot PNCummings JLKatz IRMintzer JPerdomo CASchwam EMet alA randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study of the efficacy and safety of donepezil in patients with Alzheimer's disease in the nursing home setting. J Am Geriatr Soc2001;49:1590-9. [PMID: 11843990] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 122. Thomas AIacono DBonanni LD'Andreamatteo G, and Onofrj MDonepezil, rivastigmine, and vitamin E in Alzheimer disease: a combined P300 event-related potentials/neuropsychologic evaluation over 6 months. Clin Neuropharmacol2001;24:31-42. [PMID: 11290880] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 123. Tune LTiseo PJIeni JPerdomo CPratt RDVotaw JRet alDonepezil HCl (E2020) maintains functional brain activity in patients with Alzheimer disease: results of a 24-week, double-blind, placebo-controlled study. Am J Geriatr Psychiatry2003;11:169-77. [PMID: 12611746] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 124. Wilkinson DDoody RHelme RTaubman KMintzer JKertesz Aet alDonepezil 308 Study GroupDonepezil in vascular dementia: a randomized, placebo-controlled study. Neurology2003;61:479-86. [PMID: 12939421] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 125. Winblad BEngedal KSoininen HVerhey FWaldemar GWimo Aet alDonepezil Nordic Study GroupA 1-year, randomized, placebo-controlled study of donepezil in patients with mild to moderate AD. Neurology2001;57:489-95. [PMID: 11502918] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 126. Auchus APBrashear HRSalloway SKorczyn ADDe Deyn PP, and Gassmann-Mayer CGAL-INT-26 Study GroupGalantamine treatment of vascular dementia: a randomized trial. Neurology2007;69:448-58. [PMID: 17664404] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 127. Rockwood KFay SSong XMacKnight C, and Gorman MVideo-Imaging Synthesis of Treating Alzheimer's Disease (VISTA) InvestigatorsAttainment of treatment goals by people with Alzheimer's disease receiving galantamine: a randomized controlled trial. CMAJ2006;174:1099-105. [PMID: 16554498] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 128. Brodaty HCorey-Bloom JPotocnik FCTruyen LGold M, and Damaraju CRGalantamine prolonged-release formulation in the treatment of mild to moderate Alzheimer's disease. Dement Geriatr Cogn Disord2005;20:120-32. [PMID: 15990426] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 129. Bullock RErkinjuntti T, and Lilienfeld SGAL-INT-6 Study GroupManagement of patients with Alzheimer's disease plus cerebrovascular disease: 12-month treatment with galantamine. Dement Geriatr Cogn Disord2004;17:29-34. [PMID: 14560062] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 130. Erkinjuntti TKurz AGauthier SBullock RLilienfeld S, and Damaraju CVEfficacy of galantamine in probable vascular dementia and Alzheimer's disease combined with cerebrovascular disease: a randomised trial. Lancet2002;359:1283-90. [PMID: 11965273] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 131. Koontz J and Baskys AEffects of galantamine on working memory and global functioning in patients with mild cognitive impairment: a double-blind placebo-controlled study. Am J Alzheimers Dis Other Demen2005;20:295-302. [PMID: 16273995] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 132. Raskind MAPeskind ERWessel T, and Yuan WGalantamine in AD: A 6-month randomized, placebo-controlled trial with a 6-month extension. The Galantamine USA-1 Study Group. Neurology2000;54:2261-8. [PMID: 10881250] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 133. Rockwood KMintzer JTruyen LWessel T, and Wilkinson DEffects of a flexible galantamine dose in Alzheimer's disease: a randomised, controlled trial. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry2001;71:589-95. [PMID: 11606667] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 134. Tariot PNSolomon PRMorris JCKershaw PLilienfeld S, and Ding CA 5-month, randomized, placebo-controlled trial of galantamine in AD. The Galantamine USA-10 Study Group. Neurology2000;54:2269-76. [PMID: 10881251] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 135. Wilcock GKLilienfeld S, and Gaens EEfficacy and safety of galantamine in patients with mild to moderate Alzheimer's disease: multicentre randomised controlled trial. Galantamine International-1 Study Group. BMJ2000;321:1445-9. [PMID: 11110737] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 136. Wilkinson D and Murray JGalantamine: a randomized, double-blind, dose comparison in patients with Alzheimer's disease. Int J Geriatr Psychiatry2001;16:852-7. [PMID: 11571763] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 137. Wilkinson DG and Howe ISwitching from donepezil to galantamine: a double-blind study of two wash-out periods [Letter]. Int J Geriatr Psychiatry2005;20:489-91. [PMID: 15852437] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 138. Ballard CSauter MScheltens PHe YBarkhof Fvan Straaten ECet alEfficacy, safety and tolerability of rivastigmine capsules in patients with probable vascular dementia: the VantagE study. Curr Med Res Opin2008;24:2561-74. [PMID: 18674411] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 139. Feldman HH and Lane RStudy 304 GroupRivastigmine: a placebo controlled trial of twice daily and three times daily regimens in patients with Alzheimer's disease. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry2007;78:1056-63. [PMID: 17353259] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 140. Mok VWong AHo SLeung TLam WW, and Wong KSRivastigmine in Chinese patients with subcortical vascular dementia. Neuropsychiatr Dis Treat2007;3:943-8. [PMID: 19300631] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 141. Winblad BCummings JAndreasen NGrossberg GOnofrj MSadowsky Cet alA six-month double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled study of a transdermal patch in Alzheimer's disease—rivastigmine patch versus capsule. Int J Geriatr Psychiatry2007;22:456-67. [PMID: 17380489] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 142. Agid YDubois BAnand R, and Gharabawi GEfficacy and tolerability of rivastigmine in patients with dementia of the Alzheimer type. Curr Ther Res Clin Exp1998;59:837-45. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
    • 143. Ballard CMargallo-Lana MJuszczak EDouglas SSwann AThomas Aet alQuetiapine and rivastigmine and cognitive decline in Alzheimer's disease: randomised double blind placebo controlled trial. BMJ2005;330:874. [PMID: 15722369] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 144. Corey-Bloom JAnand R, and Veach JA randomized trial evaluating the efficacy and safety of ENA 713 (rivastigmine tartrate), a new acetylcholinesterase inhibitor, in patients with mild to moderately severe Alzheimer's disease. International Journal of Geriatric Psychopharmacology1998;1:55-65. Google Scholar
    • 145. Forette FAnand R, and Gharabawi GA phase II study in patients with Alzheimer's disease to assess the preliminary efficacy and maximum tolerated dose of rivastigmine (Exelon). Eur J Neurol1999;6:423-9. [PMID: 10362894] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 146. Karaman YErdogan FKöseoglu ETuran T, and Ersoy AOA 12-month study of the efficacy of rivastigmine in patients with advanced moderate Alzheimer's disease. Dement Geriatr Cogn Disord2005;19:51-6. [PMID: 15383747] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 147. McKeith IDel Ser TSpano PEmre MWesnes KAnand Ret alEfficacy of rivastigmine in dementia with Lewy bodies: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled international study. Lancet2000;356:2031-6. [PMID: 11145488] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 148. Potkin SGAnand RFleming KAlva GKeator DCarreon Det alBrain metabolic and clinical effects of rivastigmine in Alzheimer's disease. Int J Neuropsychopharmacol2001;4:223-30. [PMID: 11602028] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 149. Rösler MAnand RCicin-Sain AGauthier SAgid YDal-Bianco Pet alEfficacy and safety of rivastigmine in patients with Alzheimer's disease: international randomised controlled trial. BMJ1999;318:633-8. [PMID: 10066203] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 150. Bakchine S and Loft HMemantine treatment in patients with mild to moderate Alzheimer's disease: results of a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled 6-month study. J Alzheimers Dis2008;13:97-107. [PMID: 18334761] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 151. Ferris SSchneider LFarmer MKay G, and Crook TA double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of memantine in age-associated memory impairment (memantine in AAMI). Int J Geriatr Psychiatry2007;22:448-55. [PMID: 17117395] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 152. Porsteinsson APGrossberg GTMintzer J, and Olin JTMemantine MEM-MD-12 Study GroupMemantine treatment in patients with mild to moderate Alzheimer's disease already receiving a cholinesterase inhibitor: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Curr Alzheimer Res2008;5:83-9. [PMID: 18288936] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 153. Saxton JHofbauer RKWoodward MGilchrist NLPotocnik FHsu HAet alMemantine and functional communication in Alzheimer's disease: results of a 12-week, international, randomized clinical trial. J Alzheimers Dis2012;28:109-18. [PMID: 21955815] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 154. Wilkinson DFox NCBarkhof FPhul RLemming O, and Scheltens PMemantine and brain atrophy in Alzheimer's disease: a 1-year randomized controlled trial. J Alzheimers Dis2012;29:459-69. [PMID: 22269160] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 155. Orgogozo JMRigaud ASStöffler AMöbius HJ, and Forette FEfficacy and safety of memantine in patients with mild to moderate vascular dementia: a randomized, placebo-controlled trial (MMM 300). Stroke2002;33:1834-9. [PMID: 12105362] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 156. Peskind ERPotkin SGPomara NOtt BRGraham SMOlin JTet alMemantine treatment in mild to moderate Alzheimer disease: a 24-week randomized, controlled trial. Am J Geriatr Psychiatry2006;14:704-15. [PMID: 16861375] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 157. Reisberg BDoody RStöffler ASchmitt FFerris S, and Möbius HJMemantine Study GroupMemantine in moderate-to-severe Alzheimer's disease. N Engl J Med2003;348:1333-41. [PMID: 12672860] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 158. Tariot PNFarlow MRGrossberg GTGraham SMMcDonald S, and Gergel IMemantine Study GroupMemantine treatment in patients with moderate to severe Alzheimer disease already receiving donepezil: a randomized controlled trial. JAMA2004;291:317-24. [PMID: 14734594] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 159. Wilcock GMöbius HJ, and Stöffler AMMM 500 groupA double-blind, placebo-controlled multicentre study of memantine in mild to moderate vascular dementia (MMM500). Int Clin Psychopharmacol2002;17:297-305. [PMID: 12409683] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 160. Bentham PGray RSellwood EHills RCrome P, and Raftery JAD2000 Collaborative GroupAspirin in Alzheimer's disease (AD2000): a randomised open-label trial. Lancet Neurol2008;7:41-9. [PMID: 18068522] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 161. Clarke RHarrison G, and Richards SVital Trial Collaborative GroupEffect of vitamins and aspirin on markers of platelet activation, oxidative stress and homocysteine in people at high risk of dementia. J Intern Med2003;254:67-75. [PMID: 12823643] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 162. Feldman HHDoody RSKivipelto MSparks DLWaters DDJones RWet alLEADe InvestigatorsRandomized controlled trial of atorvastatin in mild to moderate Alzheimer disease: LEADe. Neurology2010;74:956-64. [PMID: 20200346] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 163. Sano MBell KLGalasko DGalvin JEThomas RGvan Dyck CHet alA randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of simvastatin to treat Alzheimer disease. Neurology2011;77:556-63. [PMID: 21795660] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 164. Simons MSchwärzler FLütjohann Dvon Bergmann KBeyreuther KDichgans Jet alTreatment with simvastatin in normocholesterolemic patients with Alzheimer's disease: A 26-week randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind trial. Ann Neurol2002;52:346-50. [PMID: 12205648] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 165. Sparks DLSabbagh MNConnor DJLopez JLauner LJBrowne Pet alAtorvastatin for the treatment of mild to moderate Alzheimer disease: preliminary results. Arch Neurol2005;62:753-7. [PMID: 15883262] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 166. Pasqualetti PBonomini CDal Forno GPaulon LSinforiani EMarra Cet alA randomized controlled study on effects of ibuprofen on cognitive progression of Alzheimer's disease. Aging Clin Exp Res2009;21:102-10. [PMID: 19448381] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 167. Aisen PSSchafer KAGrundman MPfeiffer ESano MDavis KLet alAlzheimer's Disease Cooperative StudyEffects of rofecoxib or naproxen vs placebo on Alzheimer disease progression: a randomized controlled trial. JAMA2003;289:2819-26. [PMID: 12783912] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 168. de Jong DJansen RHoefnagels WJellesma-Eggenkamp MVerbeek MBorm Get alNo effect of one-year treatment with indomethacin on Alzheimer's disease progression: a randomized controlled trial. PLoS One2008;3:1475. [PMID: 18213383] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 169. Soininen HWest CRobbins J, and Niculescu LLong-term efficacy and safety of celecoxib in Alzheimer's disease. Dement Geriatr Cogn Disord2007;23:8-21. [PMID: 17068392] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 170. Henderson VWPaganini-Hill AMiller BLElble RJReyes PFShoupe Det alEstrogen for Alzheimer's disease in women: randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Neurology2000;54:295-301. [PMID: 10668686] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 171. Lu PHMasterman DAMulnard RCotman CMiller BYaffe Ket alEffects of testosterone on cognition and mood in male patients with mild Alzheimer disease and healthy elderly men. Arch Neurol2006;63:177-85. [PMID: 16344336] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 172. Mulnard RACotman CWKawas Cvan Dyck CHSano MDoody Ret alEstrogen replacement therapy for treatment of mild to moderate Alzheimer disease: a randomized controlled trial. Alzheimer's Disease Cooperative Study. JAMA2000;283:1007-15. [PMID: 10697060] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 173. Valen-Sendstad AEngedal KStray-Pedersen BStrobel CBarnett LMeyer Net alADACT Study GroupEffects of hormone therapy on depressive symptoms and cognitive functions in women with Alzheimer disease: a 12 month randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study of low-dose estradiol and norethisterone. Am J Geriatr Psychiatry2010;18:11-20. [PMID: 20094015] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 174. Wang PNLiao SQLiu RSLiu CYChao HTLu SRet alEffects of estrogen on cognition, mood, and cerebral blood flow in AD: a controlled study. Neurology2000;54:2061-6. [PMID: 10851363] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 175. Aisen PSSchneider LSSano MDiaz-Arrastia Rvan Dyck CHWeiner MFet alAlzheimer Disease Cooperative StudyHigh-dose B vitamin supplementation and cognitive decline in Alzheimer disease: a randomized controlled trial. JAMA2008;300:1774-83. [PMID: 18854539] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 176. Connelly PJPrentice NPCousland G, and Bonham JA randomised double-blind placebo-controlled trial of folic acid supplementation of cholinesterase inhibitors in Alzheimer's disease. Int J Geriatr Psychiatry2008;23:155-60. [PMID: 17600848] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 177. de Jager CAOulhaj AJacoby RRefsum H, and Smith ADCognitive and clinical outcomes of homocysteine-lowering B-vitamin treatment in mild cognitive impairment: a randomized controlled trial. Int J Geriatr Psychiatry2012;27:592-600. [PMID: 21780182] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 178. Freund-Levi YEriksdotter-Jönhagen MCederholm TBasun HFaxén-Irving GGarlind Aet alOmega-3 fatty acid treatment in 174 patients with mild to moderate Alzheimer disease: OmegAD study: a randomized double-blind trial. Arch Neurol2006;63:1402-8. [PMID: 17030655] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 179. Kwok TLee JLaw CBPan PCYung CYChoi KCet alA randomized placebo controlled trial of homocysteine lowering to reduce cognitive decline in older demented people. Clin Nutr2011;30:297-302. [PMID: 21216507] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 180. Sano MErnesto CThomas RGKlauber MRSchafer KGrundman Met alA controlled trial of selegiline, alpha-tocopherol, or both as treatment for Alzheimer's disease. The Alzheimer's Disease Cooperative Study. N Engl J Med1997;336:1216-22. [PMID: 9110909] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 181. Sinn NMilte CMStreet SJBuckley JDCoates AMPetkov Jet alEffects of n-3 fatty acids, EPA v. DHA, on depressive symptoms, quality of life, memory and executive function in older adults with mild cognitive impairment: a 6-month randomised controlled trial. Br J Nutr2012;107:1682-93. [PMID: 21929835] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 182. Quinn JFRaman RThomas RGYurko-Mauro KNelson EBVan Dyck Cet alDocosahexaenoic acid supplementation and cognitive decline in Alzheimer disease: a randomized trial. JAMA2010;304:1903-11. [PMID: 21045096] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 183. Sun YLu CJChien KLChen ST, and Chen RCEfficacy of multivitamin supplementation containing vitamins B6 and B12 and folic acid as adjunctive treatment with a cholinesterase inhibitor in Alzheimer's disease: a 26-week, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study in Taiwanese patients. Clin Ther2007;29:2204-14. [PMID: 18042476] MedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 184. van Uffelen JGChinapaw MJvan Mechelen W, and Hopman-Rock MWalking or vitamin B for cognition in older adults with mild cognitive impairment? A randomised controlled trial. Br J Sports Med2008;42:344-51. [PMID: 18308888] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 185. Yurko-Mauro KMcCarthy DRom DNelson EBRyan ASBlackwell Aet alMIDAS InvestigatorsBeneficial effects of docosahexaenoic acid on cognition in age-related cognitive decline. Alzheimers Dement2010;6:456-64. [PMID: 20434961] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 186. Belle SHBurgio LBurns RCoon DCzaja SJGallagher-Thompson Det alResources for Enhancing Alzheimer's Caregiver Health (REACH) II InvestigatorsEnhancing the quality of life of dementia caregivers from different ethnic or racial groups: a randomized, controlled trial. Ann Intern Med2006;145:727-38 LinkGoogle Scholar
    • 187. Brodaty H and Gresham MEffect of a training programme to reduce stress in carers of patients with dementia. BMJ1989;299:1375-9. [PMID: 2513967] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 188. Burgio LStevens AGuy DRoth DL, and Haley WEImpact of two psychosocial interventions on white and African American family caregivers of individuals with dementia. Gerontologist2003;43:568-79. [PMID: 12937335] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 189. Chu HYang CYLiao YHChang LIChen CHLin CCet alThe effects of a support group on dementia caregivers' burden and depression. J Aging Health2011;23:228-41. [PMID: 20847363] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 190. Coon DWThompson LSteffen ASorocco K, and Gallagher-Thompson DAnger and depression management: psychoeducational skill training interventions for women caregivers of a relative with dementia. Gerontologist2003;43:678-89. [PMID: 14570964] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 191. Gallagher-Thompson DCoon DWSolano NAmbler CRabinowitz Y, and Thompson LWChange in indices of distress among Latino and Anglo female caregivers of elderly relatives with dementia: site-specific results from the REACH national collaborative study. Gerontologist2003;43:580-91. [PMID: 12937336] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 192. de Rotrou JCantegreil IFaucounau VWenisch EChausson CJegou Det alDo patients diagnosed with Alzheimer's disease benefit from a psycho-educational programme for family caregivers? A randomised controlled study. Int J Geriatr Psychiatry2011;26:833-42. [PMID: 20922772] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 193. Gallagher-Thompson DGray HLDupart TJimenez D, and Thompson LWEffectiveness of cognitive/behavioral small group intervention for reduction of depression and stress in non-Hispanic white and Hispanic/Latino women dementia family caregivers: outcomes and mediators of change. J Ration Emot Cogn Behav Ther2008;26:286-303. CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 194. Hébert RLeclerc GBravo GGirouard D, and Lefrançois REfficacy of a support group programme for care-givers of demented patients in the community: a randomized controlled trial. Arch Gerontol Geriatr1994;18:1-14. [PMID: 15374309] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 195. Hepburn KWTornatore JCenter B, and Ostwald SWDementia family caregiver training: affecting beliefs about caregiving and caregiver outcomes. J Am Geriatr Soc2001;49:450-7. [PMID: 11347790] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 196. Kurz AWagenpfeil SHallauer JSchneider-Schelte H, and Jansen SAENEAS StudyEvaluation of a brief educational program for dementia carers: the AENEAS study. Int J Geriatr Psychiatry2010;25:861-9. [PMID: 19946869] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 197. Losada AMárquez-González M, and Romero-Moreno RMechanisms of action of a psychological intervention for dementia caregivers: effects of behavioral activation and modification of dysfunctional thoughts. Int J Geriatr Psychiatry2011;26:1119-27. [PMID: 21061414] MedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 198. Ostwald SKHepburn KWCaron WBurns T, and Mantell RReducing caregiver burden: a randomized psychoeducational intervention for caregivers of persons with dementia. Gerontologist1999;39:299-309. [PMID: 10396888] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 199. Ulstein IDSandvik LWyller TB, and Engedal KA one-year randomized controlled psychosocial intervention study among family carers of dementia patients—effects on patients and carers. Dement Geriatr Cogn Disord2007;24:469-75. [PMID: 17986818] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 200. Waldorff FBBuss DVEckermann ARasmussen MLKeiding NRishøj Set alEfficacy of psychosocial intervention in patients with mild Alzheimer's disease: the multicentre, rater blinded, randomised Danish Alzheimer Intervention Study (DAISY). BMJ2012;345:4693. [PMID: 22807076] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 201. Chang BLCognitive-behavioral intervention for homebound caregivers of persons with dementia. Nurs Res1999;48:173-82. [PMID: 10337848] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 202. Ducharme FCLévesque LLLachance LMKergoat MJLegault AJBeaudet LMet al“Learning to become a family caregiver” efficacy of an intervention program for caregivers following diagnosis of dementia in a relative. Gerontologist2011;51:484-94. [PMID: 21383112] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 203. Gitlin LNCorcoran MWinter LBoyce A, and Hauck WWA randomized, controlled trial of a home environmental intervention: effect on efficacy and upset in caregivers and on daily function of persons with dementia. Gerontologist2001;41:4-14. [PMID: 11220813] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 204. Gitlin LNBelle SHBurgio LDCzaja SJMahoney DGallagher-Thompson Det alREACH InvestigatorsEffect of multicomponent interventions on caregiver burden and depression: the REACH multisite initiative at 6-month follow-up. Psychol Aging2003;18:361-74. [PMID: 14518800] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 205. Gitlin LNWinter LBurke JChernett NDennis MP, and Hauck WWTailored activities to manage neuropsychiatric behaviors in persons with dementia and reduce caregiver burden: a randomized pilot study. Am J Geriatr Psychiatry2008;16:229-39. [PMID: 18310553] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 206. Gitlin LNWinter LDennis MPHodgson N, and Hauck WWA biobehavioral home-based intervention and the well-being of patients with dementia and their caregivers: the COPE randomized trial. JAMA2010;304:983-91. [PMID: 20810376] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 207. Gitlin LNWinter LDennis MPHodgson N, and Hauck WWTargeting and managing behavioral symptoms in individuals with dementia: a randomized trial of a nonpharmacological intervention. J Am Geriatr Soc2010;58:1465-74. [PMID: 20662955] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 208. Graff MJVernooij-Dassen MJThijssen MDekker JHoefnagels WH, and Rikkert MGCommunity based occupational therapy for patients with dementia and their care givers: randomised controlled trial. BMJ2006;333:1196. [PMID: 17114212] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 209. Hébert RLévesque LVézina JLavoie JPDucharme FGendron Cet alEfficacy of a psychoeducative group program for caregivers of demented persons living at home: a randomized controlled trial. J Gerontol B Psychol Sci Soc Sci2003;58:S58-67. [PMID: 12496309] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 210. Hinchliffe ACHyman ILBlizard B, and Livingston GBehavioural complications of dementia—can they be treated? Int J Geriatr Psychiatry1995;10:839-47. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
    • 211. Huang HLShyu YIChen MCChen ST, and Lin LCA pilot study on a home-based caregiver training program for improving caregiver self-efficacy and decreasing the behavioral problems of elders with dementia in Taiwan. Int J Geriatr Psychiatry2003;18:337-45. [PMID: 12673611] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 212. Marriott ADonaldson CTarrier N, and Burns AEffectiveness of cognitive-behavioural family intervention in reducing the burden of care in carers of patients with Alzheimer's disease. Br J Psychiatry2000;176:557-62. [PMID: 10974962] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 213. Martín-Carrasco MMartín MFValero CPMillán PRGarcía CIMontalbán SRet alEffectiveness of a psychoeducational intervention program in the reduction of caregiver burden in Alzheimer's disease patients' caregivers. Int J Geriatr Psychiatry2009;24:489-99. [PMID: 18949763] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 214. Martin-Cook KDavis BAHynan LS, and Weiner MFA randomized, controlled study of an Alzheimer's caregiver skills training program. Am J Alzheimers Dis Other Demen2005;20:204-10. [PMID: 16136843] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 215. Roberts JBrowne GMilne CSpooner LGafni ADrummond-Young Met alProblem-solving counseling for caregivers of the cognitively impaired: effective for whom? Nurs Res1999;48:162-72. [PMID: 10337847] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 216. Schoenmakers BBuntinx F, and Delepeleire JSupporting family carers of community-dwelling elder with cognitive decline: a randomized controlled trial. Int J Family Med2010;2010:184152. [PMID: 22332005] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 217. Spijker AWollersheim HTeerenstra SGraff MAdang EVerhey Fet alSystematic care for caregivers of patients with dementia: a multicenter, cluster-randomized, controlled trial. Am J Geriatr Psychiatry2011;19:521-31. [PMID: 21358385] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 218. Voigt-Radloff SGraff MLeonhart RSchornstein KJessen FBohlken Jet alA multicentre RCT on community occupational therapy in Alzheimer's disease: 10 sessions are not better than one consultation. BMJ Open2011;1:000096. [PMID: 22021760] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 219. Williams VPBishop-Fitzpatrick LLane JDGwyther LPBallard ELVendittelli APet alVideo-based coping skills to reduce health risk and improve psychological and physical well-being in Alzheimer's disease family caregivers. Psychosom Med2010;72:897-904. [PMID: 20978227] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 220. Wright LKLitaker MLaraia MT, and DeAndrade SContinuum of care for Alzheimer's disease: a nurse education and counseling program. Issues Ment Health Nurs2001;22:231-52. [PMID: 11885210] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 221. Brennan PFMoore SM, and Smyth KAThe effects of a special computer network on caregivers of persons with Alzheimer's disease. Nurs Res1995;44:166-72. [PMID: 7761293] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 222. Finkel SCzaja SJSchulz RMartinovich ZHarris C, and Pezzuto DE-care: a telecommunications technology intervention for family caregivers of dementia patients. Am J Geriatr Psychiatry2007;15:443-8. [PMID: 17463195] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 223. Mahoney DFTarlow BJ, and Jones RNEffects of an automated telephone support system on caregiver burden and anxiety: findings from the REACH for TLC intervention study. Gerontologist2003;43:556-67. [PMID: 12937334] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 224. Joling KJvan Marwijk HWSmit Fvan der Horst HEScheltens Pvan de Ven PMet alDoes a family meetings intervention prevent depression and anxiety in family caregivers of dementia patients? A randomized trial. PLoS One2012;7:30936. [PMID: 22303473] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 225. Mittelman MSBrodaty HWallen AS, and Burns AA three-country randomized controlled trial of a psychosocial intervention for caregivers combined with pharmacological treatment for patients with Alzheimer disease: effects on caregiver depression. Am J Geriatr Psychiatry2008;16:893-904. [PMID: 18978250] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 226. Callahan CMBoustani MAUnverzagt FWAustrom MGDamush TMPerkins AJet alEffectiveness of collaborative care for older adults with Alzheimer disease in primary care: a randomized controlled trial. JAMA2006;295:2148-57. [PMID: 16684985] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 227. Chu PEdwards JLevin R, and Thomson JThe use of clinical case management for early stage Alzheimer's patients and their families. Am J Alzheimers Dis Other Demen2000;15:284-90. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
    • 228. Eloniemi-Sulkava UNotkola ILHentinen MKivelä SLSivenius J, and Sulkava REffects of supporting community-living demented patients and their caregivers: a randomized trial. J Am Geriatr Soc2001;49:1282-7. [PMID: 11890485] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 229. Eloniemi-Sulkava USaarenheimo MLaakkonen MLPietilä MSavikko NKautiainen Het alFamily care as collaboration: effectiveness of a multicomponent support program for elderly couples with dementia. Randomized controlled intervention study. J Am Geriatr Soc2009;57:2200-8. [PMID: 20121986] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 230. Fortinsky RHKulldorff MKleppinger A, and Kenyon-Pesce LDementia care consultation for family caregivers: collaborative model linking an Alzheimer's association chapter with primary care physicians. Aging Ment Health2009;13:162-70. [PMID: 19347683] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 231. Jansen APvan Hout HPNijpels GRijmen FDröes RMPot AMet alEffectiveness of case management among older adults with early symptoms of dementia and their primary informal caregivers: a randomized clinical trial. Int J Nurs Stud2011;48:933-43. [PMID: 21356537] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 232. Lam LCLee JSChung JCLau AWoo J, and Kwok TCA randomized controlled trial to examine the effectiveness of case management model for community dwelling older persons with mild dementia in Hong Kong. Int J Geriatr Psychiatry2010;25:395-402. [PMID: 19606455] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 233. Vickrey BGMittman BSConnor KIPearson MLDella Penna RDGaniats TGet alThe effect of a disease management intervention on quality and outcomes of dementia care: a randomized, controlled trial. Ann Intern Med2006;145:713-26 LinkGoogle Scholar
    • 234. Logiudice DWaltrowicz WBrown KBurrows CAmes D, and Flicker LDo memory clinics improve the quality of life of carers? A randomized pilot trial. Int J Geriatr Psychiatry1999;14:626-32. [PMID: 10489653] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 235. Charlesworth GShepstone LWilson EReynolds SMugford MPrice Det alBefriending carers of people with dementia: randomised controlled trial. BMJ2008;336:1295-7. [PMID: 18505757] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 236. Pillemer K and Suitor JJPeer support for Alzheimer's caregivers: is it enough to make a difference? Res Aging2002;24:171-92. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
    • 237. Winter L and Gitlin LNEvaluation of a telephone-based support group intervention for female caregivers of community-dwelling individuals with dementia. Am J Alzheimers Dis Other Demen2006;21:391-7. [PMID: 17267370] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 238. Connell CM and Janevic MREffects of a Telephone-Based Exercise Intervention for Dementia Caregiving Wives: A Randomized Controlled Trial. J Appl Gerontol2009;28:171-194. [PMID: 21709757] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 239. Hirano ASuzuki YKuzuya MOnishi JBan N, and Umegaki HInfluence of regular exercise on subjective sense of burden and physical symptoms in community-dwelling caregivers of dementia patients: a randomized controlled trial. Arch Gerontol Geriatr2011;53:158-63. [PMID: 20850878] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 240. King ACBaumann KO'Sullivan PWilcox S, and Castro CEffects of moderate-intensity exercise on physiological, behavioral, and emotional responses to family caregiving: a randomized controlled trial. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci2002;57:M26-36. [PMID: 11773209] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 241. Bass DMClark PALooman WJMcCarthy CA, and Eckert SThe Cleveland Alzheimer's managed care demonstration: outcomes after 12 months of implementation. Gerontologist2003;43:73-85. [PMID: 12604748] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 242. Chapman SBWeiner MFRackley AHynan LS, and Zientz JEffects of cognitive-communication stimulation for Alzheimer's disease patients treated with donepezil. J Speech Lang Hear Res2004;47:1149-63. [PMID: 15603468] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 243. Buschert VCFriese UTeipel SJSchneider PMerensky WRujescu Det alEffects of a newly developed cognitive intervention in amnestic mild cognitive impairment and mild Alzheimer's disease: a pilot study. J Alzheimers Dis2011;25:679-94. [PMID: 21483095] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 244. Tsolaki MKounti FAgogiatou CPoptsi EBakoglidou EZafeiropoulou Met alEffectiveness of nonpharmacological approaches in patients with mild cognitive impairment. Neurodegener Dis2011;8:138-45. [PMID: 21135531] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 245. Olazarán JMuñiz RReisberg BPeña-Casanova Jdel Ser TCruz-Jentoft AJet alBenefits of cognitive-motor intervention in MCI and mild to moderate Alzheimer disease. Neurology2004;63:2348-53. [PMID: 15623698] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 246. Quayhagen MPQuayhagen MCorbeil RRRoth PA, and Rodgers JAA dyadic remediation program for care recipients with dementia. Nurs Res1995;44:153-9. [PMID: 7761291] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 247. Kinsella GJMullaly ERand EOng BBurton CPrice Set alEarly intervention for mild cognitive impairment: a randomised controlled trial. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry2009;80:730-6. [PMID: 19332424] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 248. Rapp SBrenes G, and Marsh APMemory enhancement training for older adults with mild cognitive impairment: a preliminary study. Aging Ment Health2002;6:5-11. [PMID: 11827617] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 249. Troyer AKMurphy KJAnderson NDMoscovitch M, and Craik FIChanging everyday memory behaviour in amnestic mild cognitive impairment: a randomised controlled trial. Neuropsychol Rehabil2008;18:65-88. [PMID: 17943615] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 250. Burgener SCYang YGilbert R, and Marsh-Yant SThe effects of a multimodal intervention on outcomes of persons with early-stage dementia. Am J Alzheimers Dis Other Demen2008;23:382-94. [PMID: 18453642] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 251. Cahn-Weiner DAMalloy PFRebok GW, and Ott BRResults of a randomized placebo-controlled study of memory training for mildly impaired Alzheimer's disease patients. Appl Neuropsychol2003;10:215-23. [PMID: 14690802] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 252. Clare LLinden DEWoods RTWhitaker REvans SJParkinson CHet alGoal-oriented cognitive rehabilitation for people with early-stage Alzheimer disease: a single-blind randomized controlled trial of clinical efficacy. Am J Geriatr Psychiatry2010;18:928-39. [PMID: 20808145] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 253. Greenaway MCDuncan NL, and Smith GEThe memory support system for mild cognitive impairment: randomized trial of a cognitive rehabilitation intervention. Int J Geriatr Psychiatry2013;28:402-9. [PMID: 22678947] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 254. Schwenk MZieschang TOster P, and Hauer KDual-task performances can be improved in patients with dementia: a randomized controlled trial. Neurology2010;74:1961-8. [PMID: 20445152] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 255. Kurz AThöne-Otto ACramer BEgert SFrölich LGertz HJet alCORDIAL: cognitive rehabilitation and cognitive-behavioral treatment for early dementia in Alzheimer disease: a multicenter, randomized, controlled trial. Alzheimer Dis Assoc Disord2012;26:246-53. [PMID: 21986341] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 256. Baker LDFrank LLFoster-Schubert KGreen PSWilkinson CWMcTiernan Aet alEffects of aerobic exercise on mild cognitive impairment: a controlled trial. Arch Neurol2010;67:71-9. [PMID: 20065132] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 257. Lam LCChau RCWong BMFung AWLui VWTam CCet alInterim follow-up of a randomized controlled trial comparing Chinese style mind body (Tai Chi) and stretching exercises on cognitive function in subjects at risk of progressive cognitive decline. Int J Geriatr Psychiatry2011;26:733-40. [PMID: 21495078] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 258. Lautenschlager NTCox KLFlicker LFoster JKvan Bockxmeer FMXiao Jet alEffect of physical activity on cognitive function in older adults at risk for Alzheimer disease: a randomized trial. JAMA2008;300:1027-37. [PMID: 18768414] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 259. Nagamatsu LSHandy TCHsu CLVoss M, and Liu-Ambrose TResistance training promotes cognitive and functional brain plasticity in seniors with probable mild cognitive impairment. Arch Intern Med2012;172:666-8. [PMID: 22529236] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 260. Steinberg MLeoutsakos JMPodewils LJ, and Lyketsos CGEvaluation of a home-based exercise program in the treatment of Alzheimer's disease: the Maximizing Independence in Dementia (MIND) study. Int J Geriatr Psychiatry2009;24:680-5. [PMID: 19089875] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 261. Suzuki TShimada HMakizako HDoi TYoshida DTsutsumimoto Ket alEffects of multicomponent exercise on cognitive function in older adults with amnestic mild cognitive impairment: a randomized controlled trial. BMC Neurol2012;12:128. [PMID: 23113898] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 262. Teri LLogsdon RG, and McCurry SMExercise interventions for dementia and cognitive impairment: the Seattle Protocols. J Nutr Health Aging2008;12:391-4. [PMID: 18548177] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 263. Tsai PFChang JYBeck CKuo YF, and Keefe FJA pilot cluster-randomized trial of a 20-week Tai Chi program in elders with cognitive impairment and osteoarthritic knee: effects on pain and other health outcomes. J Pain Symptom Manage2013;45:660-9. [PMID: 23017610] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 264. Venturelli MLanza MMuti E, and Schena FPositive effects of physical training in activity of daily living-dependent older adults. Exp Aging Res2010;36:190-205. [PMID: 20209421] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 265. Vreugdenhil ACannell JDavies A, and Razay GA community-based exercise programme to improve functional ability in people with Alzheimer's disease: a randomized controlled trial. Scand J Caring Sci2012;26:12-9. [PMID: 21564154] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 266. Bellantonio SKenny AMFortinsky RHKleppinger ARobison JGruman Cet alEfficacy of a geriatrics team intervention for residents in dementia-specific assisted living facilities: effect on unanticipated transitions. J Am Geriatr Soc2008;56:523-8. [PMID: 18179497] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 267. Meeuwsen EJMelis RJVan Der Aa GCGolüke-Willemse GADe Leest BJVan Raak FHet alEffectiveness of dementia follow-up care by memory clinics or general practitioners: randomised controlled trial. BMJ2012;344:3086. [PMID: 22589500] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 268. Nourhashemi FAndrieu SGillette-Guyonnet SGiraudeau BCantet CColey Net alPLASA GroupEffectiveness of a specific care plan in patients with Alzheimer's disease: cluster randomised trial (PLASA study). BMJ2010;340:c2466. [PMID: 20522656] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 269. Richard EVan den Heuvel EMoll van Charante EPAchthoven LVermeulen MBindels PJet alPrevention of dementia by intensive vascular care (PreDIVA): a cluster-randomized trial in progress. Alzheimer Dis Assoc Disord2009;23:198-204. [PMID: 19812459] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 270. Wolfs CAKessels ADirksen CDSeverens JL, and Verhey FRIntegrated multidisciplinary diagnostic approach for dementia care: randomised controlled trial. Br J Psychiatry2008;192:300-5. [PMID: 18378994] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 271. Beer CHorner BFlicker LScherer SLautenschlager NTBretland Net alA cluster-randomised trial of staff education to improve the quality of life of people with dementia living in residential care: the DIRECT study. PLoS One2011;6:28155. [PMID: 22140531] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 272. Menn PHolle RKunz SDonath CLauterberg JLeidl Ret alDementia care in the general practice setting: a cluster randomized trial on the effectiveness and cost impact of three management strategies. Value Health2012;15:851-9. [PMID: 22999135] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 273. Boada-Rovira MBrodaty HCras PBaloyannis SEmre MZhang Ret al322 Study GroupEfficacy and safety of donepezil in patients with Alzheimer's disease: results of a global, multinational, clinical experience study. Drugs Aging2004;21:43-53. [PMID: 14715043] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 274. Relkin NRReichman WEOrazem J, and McRae TA large, community-based, open-label trial of donepezil in the treatment of Alzheimer's disease. Dement Geriatr Cogn Disord2003;16:15-24. [PMID: 12714795] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 275. Babai SAuriche P, and Le-Louët HComparison of adverse drug reactions with donepezil versus memantine: analysis of the French Pharmacovigilance Database. Therapie2010;65:255-9. [PMID: 20699079] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 276. Hernandez RKFarwell WCantor MD, and Lawler EVCholinesterase inhibitors and incidence of bradycardia in patients with dementia in the veterans affairs New England healthcare system. J Am Geriatr Soc2009;57:1997-2003. [PMID: 19793162] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 277. Park-Wyllie LYMamdani MMLi PGill SSLaupacis A, and Juurlink DNCholinesterase inhibitors and hospitalization for bradycardia: a population-based study. PLoS Med2009;6:1000157. [PMID: 19787032] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 278. Dunn NRPearce GL, and Shakir SAAdverse effects associated with the use of donepezil in general practice in England. J Psychopharmacol2000;14:406-8. [PMID: 11198060] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 279. Pariente ASanctussy DJMiremont-Salamé GMoore NHaramburu F, and Fourrier-Réglat Al'Association Française des Centres Régionaux de Pharmacovigilance (CRPV)Factors associated with serious adverse reactions to cholinesterase inhibitors: a study of spontaneous reporting. CNS Drugs2010;24:55-63. [PMID: 20030419] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 280. Froelich LAndreasen NTsolaki MFoucher AKavanagh SBaelen BVet alLong-term treatment of patients with Alzheimer's disease in primary and secondary care: results from an international survey. Curr Med Res Opin2009;25:3059-68. [PMID: 19852697] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 281. Vidal JSLacombe JMDartigues JFPasquier FRobert PTzourio Cet alMemantine therapy for Alzheimer disease in real-world practice: an observational study in a large representative sample of French patients. Alzheimer Dis Assoc Disord2008;22:125-30. [PMID: 18525283] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 282. Van Der Putt RDineen CJanes DSeries H, and McShane REffectiveness of acetylcholinesterase inhibitors: diagnosis and severity as predictors of response in routine practice. Int J Geriatr Psychiatry2006;21:755-60. [PMID: 16906631] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 283. Gill SSAnderson GMFischer HDBell CMLi PNormand SLet alSyncope and its consequences in patients with dementia receiving cholinesterase inhibitors: a population-based cohort study. Arch Intern Med2009;169:867-73. [PMID: 19433698] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 284. Raschetti RMaggini MSorrentino GCMartini NCaffari B, and Vanacore NA cohort study of effectiveness of acetylcholinesterase inhibitors in Alzheimer's disease. Eur J Clin Pharmacol2005;61:361-8. [PMID: 15912389] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 285. Fosbøl ELPeterson EDHolm EGislason GHZhang YCurtis LHet alComparative cardiovascular safety of dementia medications: a cross-national study. J Am Geriatr Soc2012;60:2283-9. [PMID: 23176182] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 286. Stephenson ASeitz DPFischer HDGruneir ABell CMGershon ASet alCholinesterase inhibitors and adverse pulmonary events in older people with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and concomitant dementia: a population-based, cohort study. Drugs Aging2012;29:213-23. [PMID: 22332932] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 287. Förstl HStamouli SSJanetzky WGalanopoulos AKarageorgiou C, and Tzanakaki MMemantine in everyday clinical practice: a comparison of studies in Germany and Greece. Dement Geriatr Cogn Disord2011;32:267-72. [PMID: 22237255] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 288. Requena CMaestú FCampo PFernández A, and Ortiz TEffects of cholinergic drugs and cognitive training on dementia: 2-year follow-up. Dement Geriatr Cogn Disord2006;22:339-45. [PMID: 16954689] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 289. Burns AGauthier S, and Perdomo CEfficacy and safety of donepezil over 3 years: an open-label, multicentre study in patients with Alzheimer's disease. Int J Geriatr Psychiatry2007;22:806-12. [PMID: 17199235] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 290. Wilkinson DRóman GSalloway SHecker JBoundy KKumar Det alThe long-term efficacy and tolerability of donepezil in patients with vascular dementia. Int J Geriatr Psychiatry2010;25:305-13. [PMID: 19623601] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 291. Munoz DG and Feldman HCauses of Alzheimer's disease. CMAJ2000;162:65-72. [PMID: 11216203] MedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 292. Aronson SVan Baelen BKavanagh S, and Schwalen SOptimal dosing of galantamine in patients with mild or moderate Alzheimer's disease: post Hoc analysis of a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Drugs Aging2009;26:231-9. [PMID: 19358618] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 293. Ott BRBlake LMKagan E, and Resnick MMemantine MEM-MD-11AB Study GroupOpen label, multicenter, 28-week extension study of the safety and tolerability of memantine in patients with mild to moderate Alzheimer's disease. J Neurol2007;254:351-8. [PMID: 17345042] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 294. Kadir ADarreh-Shori TAlmkvist OWall AGrut MStrandberg Bet alPET imaging of the in vivo brain acetylcholinesterase activity and nicotine binding in galantamine-treated patients with AD. Neurobiol Aging2008;29:1204-17. [PMID: 17379359] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 295. Teri LGibbons LEMcCurry SMLogsdon RGBuchner DMBarlow WEet alExercise plus behavioral management in patients with Alzheimer disease: a randomized controlled trial. JAMA2003;290:2015-22. [PMID: 14559955] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 296. Quayhagen MP and Quayhagen MTesting of a cognitive stimulation intervention for dementia caregiving dyads. Neuropsychol Rehabil2001;11:319-32. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
    • 297. Boustani MPeterson BHarris RLux LJKrasnov CSutton SFet alScreening for dementia [Internet]. Systematic Evidence Reviews2003;:. [PMID: 20722116] MedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 298. Brodaty HLow LFGibson L, and Burns KWhat is the best dementia screening instrument for general practitioners to use? Am J Geriatr Psychiatry2006;14:391-400. [PMID: 16670243] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 299. Russ TC and Morling JRCholinesterase inhibitors for mild cognitive impairment. Cochrane Database Syst Rev2012;9:CD009132. [PMID: 22972133] MedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 300. National Institute for Health and Clinical ExcellenceDonepezil, galantamine, rivastigmine and memantine for the treatment of Alzheimer's disease. NICE technology appraisal guidance 217. London National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence 2011. Google Scholar
    • 301. Vernooij-Dassen MDraskovic IMcCleery J, and Downs MCognitive reframing for carers of people with dementia. Cochrane Database Syst Rev2011;:CD005318. [PMID: 22071821] MedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 302. Goy EKansagara D, and Freeman MA systematic evidence review of interventions for non-professional caregivers of individuals with dementia. VA Evidence-based Synthesis Program Reports2010;:. [PMID: 21155197] MedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 303. Chien LYChu HGuo JLLiao YMChang LIChen CHet alCaregiver support groups in patients with dementia: a meta-analysis. Int J Geriatr Psychiatry2011;26:1089-98. [PMID: 21308785] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 304. Tam-Tham HCepoiu-Martin MRonksley PEMaxwell CJ, and Hemmelgarn BRDementia case management and risk of long-term care placement: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Int J Geriatr Psychiatry2013;28:889-902. [PMID: 23188735] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 305. Olazarán JReisberg BClare LCruz IPeña-Casanova JDel Ser Tet alNonpharmacological therapies in Alzheimer's disease: a systematic review of efficacy. Dement Geriatr Cogn Disord2010;30:161-78. [PMID: 20838046] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 306. Woods BAguirre ESpector AE, and Orrell MCognitive stimulation to improve cognitive functioning in people with dementia. Cochrane Database Syst Rev2012;2:CD005562. [PMID: 22336813] MedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 307. Reijnders Jvan Heugten C, and van Boxtel MCognitive interventions in healthy older adults and people with mild cognitive impairment: a systematic review. Ageing Res Rev2013;12:263-75. [PMID: 22841936] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 308. Kurz AFLeucht S, and Lautenschlager NTThe clinical significance of cognition-focused interventions for cognitively impaired older adults: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials. Int Psychogeriatr2011;23:1364-75. [PMID: 21740614] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 309. Pitkälä KSavikko NPoysti MStrandberg T, and Laakkonen MLEfficacy of physical exercise intervention on mobility and physical functioning in older people with dementia: a systematic review. Exp Gerontol2013;48:85-93. [PMID: 22960590] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar
    • 310. Prince MBryce R, and Ferri CWorld Alzheimer Report 2011. The Benefits of Early Diagnosis and Intervention. London Alzheimer's Disease International 2011. Google Scholar
    • 311. Rockwood KDai D, and Mitnitski APatterns of decline and evidence of subgroups in patients with Alzheimer's disease taking galantamine for up to 48 months. Int J Geriatr Psychiatry2008;23:207-14. [PMID: 17621382] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar

    Comments

    Ronald Somers, PhD13 December 2013
    No Benefit from Screening for Cognitive Impairment?

    TO THE EDITOR: I read the research report by J.S. Lin et al (1) with considerable interest and some disappointment in the authors’ conclusion. Readers were informed that `Although it is clear that brief instruments to screen for cognitive impairment can adequately detect dementia, there is no empirical evidence that screening for or early diagnosis of cognitive impairment improves decision-making or important patient, caregiver, or societal outcomes.’ There exists a clear example which runs counter to this sweeping negative conclusion. It appears that the authors did not consider the successful use of cognitive screening in the certification of driving licences. Cognitive screening is applied as part of the more general assessment of medical fitness to drive. Historically, such screening has relied on diagnostic tools that were not specifically validated for driving ability. Increasingly however, instruments have been developed which predict on-road ability (2). Readers may agree that identifying drivers who are a danger to themselves and others, and keeping them off the road, is a fairly significant patient and societal outcome.

    Ronald L Somers, PhD

    University of Adelaide

    Adelaide,

    South Australia

    Potential Conflicts of Interest: None

    References

    1. Lin JS, O’Connor E, Rossom RC, Perdue LA, Eckstrom E. Screening for cognitive impairment in older adults: a systematic review for the US Preventive Services Task Force. Ann Intern Med. 2013;159:601-12.

    2. Carr DB, Barco PP, Wallendorf MJ, Snellgrove CA, Ott BR. Predicting road test performance in drivers with dementia. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2011 Nov;59(11):2112-7.



    Rónán O'Caoimh, William Molloy25 November 2013
    Cognitive Screening in Primary Care: Key Questions.
    To the Editor: We read with interest Lin et al‘’s (1) review on behalf of the U.S Preventative Services Task Force. This important and timely systematic review clearly summarizes the current evidence base for cognitive screening, a topical and controversial issue at present (2),(3). While thorough and balanced, there are a number of wider issues that merit discussion. The authors investigated five key questions. We propose an additional five, suggested by this review, that require clarification and should direct future research in this area. These are the what, why, who, when, and where of cognitive screening?
    Firstly, what type of cognitive screening is required? The papers included in this review predominantly investigated the performance of cognitive screening tests in unselected community-dwelling older adults in primary care, the ethical and clinical benefits of which remain uncertain (1),(2). Comparison of targeted versus non-targeted screening should therefore be investigated in future.
    Secondly, why screen? The authors rightly point out that there is a lack of empirical evidence supporting expert consensus guidelines that extoll the benefits of early detection. Although screening for cognitive impairment doesn’t yet meet Wilson’s Criteria, unlike screening for other conditions, its major benefits lie in health promotion (“planning for the future”). This is difficult to measure and may explain the paucity of evidence to date.
    Thirdly who should be screened? In addition to screening symptomatic patients, the effects of targeting high-risk groups with the right cognitive screen, for example those with Parkinson’s disease, should be examined . The authors rightly highlight this and the lack of cut-off scores as factors limiting the utility of screening. The effect of developing and validating these among large populations of patients with different dementia subtypes is also required.
    Fourthly, when should cognitive screening take place? Cognitive impairment is a heterogeneous disorder and presents in a heterogeneous fashion. In this sense one single screening policy is unlikely to be successful. We agree with the authors that research comparing triggers for screening in primary care is required and suggest that future research should compare opportunistic screening with targeted approaches.
    Finally, where should screening take place? Although there is a paucity of evidence for screening in primary care, research from memory clinics suggests that primary care offers superior post-diagnostic management (4), indicating that future reviews should compare screening in primary and secondary care settings.
    We agree with the authors that the evidence that screening improves decision making in primary care is lacking but argue that this should not deter the screening of symptomatic patients. We suggest that these additional five questions highlight the future direction of research and subsequent systematic reviews into cognitive screening.

    References
    1. Lin JS, O'Connor E, Rossom RC, Leslie A. Perdue LA, Eckstrom E. Screening for Cognitive Impairment in Older Adults: A Systematic Review for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. Ann Intern Med. Published online 22 October 2013 doi:10.7326/0003-4819-159-9-201311050-00730.

    2. Boustani M. Dementia Screening in Primary Care: Not Too Fast! Journal of the American Geriatrics Society 2013, 61: 1205–1207.

    3. McCarten JR. The case for screening for cognitive impairment in older adults. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2013 Jul;61(7):1203-5. doi: 10.1111/jgs.12319_1. Epub 2013 Jun 19.

    4. Meeuwsen EJ, Melis RJ, Van Der Aa GC, Golüke-Willemse GA, De Leest BJ, Van Raak FH, Schölzel-Dorenbos CJ, Verheijen DC, Verhey FR, Visser MC, Wolfs CA, Adang EM, Olde Rikkert MG. Effectiveness of dementia follow-up care by memory clinics or general practitioners: randomised controlled trial. BMJ 2012 May 15;344:e3086. doi: 10.1136/bmj.e3086.