MbrlCatalogueTitleDetail

Do you wish to reserve the book?
Diagnostic accuracy of the Brief Assessment of Impaired Cognition case‐finding instrument in a general practice setting and comparison with other widely used brief cognitive tests—a cross‐validation study
Diagnostic accuracy of the Brief Assessment of Impaired Cognition case‐finding instrument in a general practice setting and comparison with other widely used brief cognitive tests—a cross‐validation study
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
You are currently in the queue to collect this book. You will be notified once it is your turn to collect the book.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Diagnostic accuracy of the Brief Assessment of Impaired Cognition case‐finding instrument in a general practice setting and comparison with other widely used brief cognitive tests—a cross‐validation study
Oops! Something went wrong.
Oops! Something went wrong.
While trying to remove the title from your shelf something went wrong :( Kindly try again later!
Title added to your shelf!
Title added to your shelf!
View what I already have on My Shelf.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Oops! Something went wrong.
While trying to add the title to your shelf something went wrong :( Kindly try again later!
Do you wish to request the book?
Diagnostic accuracy of the Brief Assessment of Impaired Cognition case‐finding instrument in a general practice setting and comparison with other widely used brief cognitive tests—a cross‐validation study
Diagnostic accuracy of the Brief Assessment of Impaired Cognition case‐finding instrument in a general practice setting and comparison with other widely used brief cognitive tests—a cross‐validation study

Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
How would you like to get it?
We have requested the book for you! Sorry the robot delivery is not available at the moment
We have requested the book for you!
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Diagnostic accuracy of the Brief Assessment of Impaired Cognition case‐finding instrument in a general practice setting and comparison with other widely used brief cognitive tests—a cross‐validation study
Diagnostic accuracy of the Brief Assessment of Impaired Cognition case‐finding instrument in a general practice setting and comparison with other widely used brief cognitive tests—a cross‐validation study
Journal Article

Diagnostic accuracy of the Brief Assessment of Impaired Cognition case‐finding instrument in a general practice setting and comparison with other widely used brief cognitive tests—a cross‐validation study

2024
Request Book From Autostore and Choose the Collection Method
Overview
Background and purpose The aim of this study was to examine the discriminative validity of the Brief Assessment of Impaired Cognition (BASIC) case‐finding instrument in a general practice (GP) setting and compare it with other widely used brief cognitive instruments. Methods Patients aged ≥70 years were prospectively recruited from 14 Danish GP clinics. Participants were classified as having either normal cognition (n = 154) or cognitive impairment (n = 101) based on neuropsychological test performance, reported instrumental activities of daily living, and concern regarding memory decline. Comparisons involved the Mini‐Mental State Examination (MMSE), the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA), the Rowland Universal Dementia Assessment Scale (RUDAS), the Mini‐Cog, the 6‐item Clock Drawing Test (CDT‐6) and the BASIC Questionnaire (BASIC‐Q). Results BASIC demonstrated good overall classification accuracy with an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) of 0.88 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.84–0.92), a sensitivity of 0.72 (95% CI 0.62–0.80) and a specificity of 0.86 (95% CI 0.79–0.91). Pairwise comparisons of the AUCs of BASIC, MMSE, MoCA and RUDAS produced non‐significant results, but BASIC had significantly higher classification accuracy than Mini‐Cog, BASIC‐Q and CDT‐6. Depending on the pretest probability of cognitive impairment, the positive predictive validity of BASIC varied from 0.83 to 0.36, and the negative predictive validity from 0.97 to 0.76. Conclusions BASIC demonstrated good discriminative validity in a GP setting. The classification accuracy of BASIC is equivalent to more complex, time‐consuming instruments, such as the MMSE, MoCA and RUDAS, and higher than very brief instruments, such as the CDT‐6, Mini‐Cog and BASIC‐Q.