Login Register Cart 0
Generic placeholder image

Current Alzheimer Research

Editor-in-Chief

ISSN (Print): 1567-2050
ISSN (Online): 1875-5828

Back
Journal Home About Journal Editorial Board Journal Insight Current Issue Volumes/Issues
Subscribe Translate in Chinese
Systematic Review Article

Accuracy of Telephone-Based Cognitive Screening Tests: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Author(s): Emma Elliott, Claire Green, David J. Llewellyn and Terence J. Quinn*

Volume 17, Issue 5, 2020

Page: [460 - 471] Pages: 12

DOI: 10.2174/1567205017999200626201121

Price: $65

Abstract

Background: Telephone-based cognitive assessments may be preferable to in-person testing in terms of test burden, economic and opportunity cost.

Objective: We sought to determine the accuracy of telephone-based screening for the identification of dementia or Mild Cognitive Impairment (MCI).

Methods: Five multidisciplinary databases were searched. Two researchers independently screened articles and extracted data. Eligible studies compared any multi-domain telephone-based assessment of cognition to the face-to-face diagnostic evaluation. Where data allowed, we pooled test accuracy metrics using the bivariate approach.

Results: From 11,732 titles, 34 papers were included, describing 15 different tests. There was variation in test scoring and quality of included studies. Pooled analyses of accuracy for dementia: Telephone Interview for Cognitive Status (TICS) (<31/41) sensitivity: 0.92, specificity: 0.66 (6 studies); TICSmodified (<28/50) sensitivity: 0.91, specificity: 0.91 (3 studies). For MCI: TICS-modified (<33/50) sensitivity: 0.82, specificity: 0.87 (3 studies); Telephone-Montreal Cognitive Assessment (<18/22) sensitivity: 0.98, specificity: 0.69 (2 studies).

Conclusion: There is limited diagnostic accuracy evidence for the many telephonic cognitive screens that exist. The TICS and TICS-m have the greatest supporting evidence; their test accuracy profiles make them suitable as initial cognitive screens where face to face assessment is not possible.

Keywords: Cognitive Impairment, dementia, telephone assessment, sensitivity, specificity, cognitive screening, diagnostic accuracy.

« Previous Next »
[1]
Fisher GG, Ryan LH. Overview of the health and retirement study and introduction to the special issue. Work Aging Retire 2018; 4(1): 1-9.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/workar/wax032] [PMID: 29423243]
[2]
Folstein MF, Folstein SE, McHugh PR. “Mini-mental state”. A practical method for grading the cognitive state of patients for the clinician. J Psychiatr Res 1975; 12(3): 189-98.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0022-3956(75)90026-6] [PMID: 1202204]
[3]
Tsoi KK, Chan JY, Hirai HW, Wong SY, Kwok TC. Cognitive tests to detect dementia: A systematic review and meta-analysis. JAMA Intern Med 2015; 175(9): 1450-8.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1001/jamainternmed.2015.2152] [PMID: 26052687]
[4]
Nasreddine ZS, Phillips NA, Bédirian V, et al. The Montreal Cognitive Assessment, MoCA: A brief screening tool for mild cognitive impairment. J Am Geriatr Soc 2005; 53(4): 695-9.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1532-5415.2005.53221.x] [PMID: 15817019]
[5]
Breton A, Casey D, Arnaoutoglou NA. Cognitive tests for the detection of mild cognitive impairment (MCI), the prodromal stage of dementia: Meta-analysis of diagnostic accuracy studies. Int J Geriatr Psychiatr 2018; 34(2): 233-42.
[PMID: 30370616]
[6]
Burton L, Tyson SF. Screening for cognitive impairment after stroke: A systematic review of psychometric properties and clinical utility. J Rehabil Med 2015; 47(3): 193-203.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.2340/16501977-1930] [PMID: 25590458]
[7]
Stolwyk RJ, O’Neill MH, McKay AJ, Wong DK. Are cognitive screening tools sensitive and specific enough for use after stroke? A systematic literature review. Stroke 2014; 45(10): 3129-34.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1161/STROKEAHA.114.004232] [PMID: 25074518]
[8]
Quinn TJ, Elliott E, Langhorne P. Cognitive and mood assessment tools for use in stroke. Stroke 2018; 49(2): 483-90.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1161/STROKEAHA.117.016994] [PMID: 29284733]
[9]
Herr M, Ankri J. A critical review of the use of telephone tests to identify cognitive impairment in epidemiology and clinical research. J Telemed Telecare 2013; 19(1): 45-54.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1357633X12474962] [PMID: 23390209]
[10]
Berthier ML. Poststroke aphasia: Epidemiology, pathophysiology and treatment. Drugs Aging 2005; 22(2): 163-82.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.2165/00002512-200522020-00006] [PMID: 15733022]
[11]
Martin-Khan M, Wootton R, Gray L. A systematic review of the reliability of screening for cognitive impairment in older adults by use of standardized assessment tools administered via the telephone. J Telemed Telecare 2010; 16(8): 422-8.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1258/jtt.2010.100209] [PMID: 21030488]
[12]
Castanho TC, Amorim L, Zihl J, Palha JA, Sousa N, Santos NC. Telephone-based screening tools for mild cognitive impairment and dementia in aging studies: A review of validated instruments. Front Aging Neurosci 2014; 6: 16-6.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fnagi.2014.00016] [PMID: 24611046]
[13]
Lewis BE, Mills CS, Mohs RC, Hill J. Improving early recognition of Alzheimer’s disease: A review of telephonic screening tools. Jcom-Wayne Pa 2001; 8(8): 41-6.
[14]
Davis DHJ, Creavin ST, Noel-Storr A, et al. Neuropsychological tests for the diagnosis of Alzheimer’s disease dementia and other dementias: A generic protocol for cross‐sectional and delayed‐verification studies. Cochrane Database Sys Rev 2013; (3): CD010460.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD010460]
[15]
McInnes MDF, Moher D, Thombs BD, et al. and the PRISMA-DTA Group. Preferred reporting items for a systematic review and meta-analysis of diagnostic test accuracy studies: The PRISMA-DTA statement. JAMA 2018; 319(4): 388-96.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1001/jama.2017.19163] [PMID: 29362800]
[16]
Román GC, Tatemichi TK, Erkinjuntti T, et al. Vascular dementia: Diagnostic criteria for research studies. Report of the NINDS-AIREN International Workshop. Neurology 1993; 43(2): 250-60.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1212/WNL.43.2.250] [PMID: 8094895]
[17]
American Psychiatric Association and American Psychiatric Association DSM-5 Task Force. Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders: DSM-5. 5th ed. Washington, D.C.: American Psychiatric Association. xliv 2013.
[18]
Whiting PF, Rutjes AW, Westwood ME, et al. QUADAS-2 Group. QUADAS-2: A revised tool for the quality assessment of diagnostic accuracy studies. Ann Intern Med 2011; 155(8): 529-36.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.7326/0003-4819-155-8-201110180-00009] [PMID: 22007046]
[19]
Takwoingi Y, Guo B, Riley RD, Deeks JJ. Performance of methods for meta-analysis of diagnostic test accuracy with few studies or sparse data. Stat Methods Med Res 2017; 26(4): 1896-911.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0962280215592269] [PMID: 26116616]
[20]
Review Manager (RevMan) 2014, The Nordic Cochrane Centre, The Cochrane Collaboration: Copenhagen 2014.
[21]
Freeman SC, Kerby CR, Patel A, Cooper NJ, Quinn T, Sutton AJ. Development of an interactive web-based tool to conduct and interrogate meta-analysis of diagnostic test accuracy studies: MetaDTA. BMC Med Res Methodol 2019; 19(1): 81.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12874-019-0724-x] [PMID: 30999861]
[22]
Dal Forno G, Chiovenda P, Bressi F, et al. Use of an Italian version of the telephone interview for cognitive status in Alzheimer’s disease. Int J Geriatr Psychiatry 2006; 21(2): 126-33.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/gps.1435] [PMID: 16416467]
[23]
Kempen GI, Meier AJ, Bouwens SF, van Deursen J, Verhey FR. Telefonisch Interview Cognitieve Status (TICS): Psychometrische aspecten. Tijdschr Gerontol Geriatr 2007; 38(1): 38-45.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF03074823] [PMID: 17447609]
[24]
Konagaya Y, Washimi Y, Hattori H, Takeda A, Watanabe T, Ohta T. Validation of the telephone interview for cognitive status (TICS) in Japanese. Int J Geriatr Psychiatry 2007; 22(7): 695-700.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/gps.1812] [PMID: 17431929]
[25]
Pendlebury ST, Welch SJ, Cuthbertson FC, Mariz J, Mehta Z, Rothwell PM. Telephone assessment of cognition after transient ischemic attack and stroke: Modified telephone interview of cognitive status and telephone montreal cognitive assessment versus face-to-face montreal cognitive assessment and neuropsychological battery. Stroke 2013; 44(1): 227-9.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1161/STROKEAHA.112.673384] [PMID: 23138443]
[26]
Knopman DS, Roberts RO, Geda YE, et al. Validation of the telephone interview for cognitive status-modified in subjects with normal cognition, mild cognitive impairment, or dementia. Neuroepidemiology 2010; 34(1): 34-42.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1159/000255464] [PMID: 19893327]
[27]
Seo EH, Lee DY, Kim SG, et al. Validity of the telephone interview for cognitive status (TICS) and modified TICS (TICSm) for mild cognitive imparment (MCI) and dementia screening. Arch Gerontol Geriatr 2011; 52(1): e26-30.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.archger.2010.04.008] [PMID: 20471701]
[28]
Cook SE, Marsiske M, McCoy KJ. The use of the Modified Telephone Interview for Cognitive Status (TICS-M) in the detection of amnestic mild cognitive impairment. J Geriatr Psychiatry Neurol 2009; 22(2): 103-9.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0891988708328214] [PMID: 19417219]
[29]
Lipton RB, Katz MJ, Kuslansky G, et al. Screening for dementia by telephone using the memory impairment screen. J Am Geriatr Soc 2003; 51(10): 1382-90.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1046/j.1532-5415.2003.51455.x] [PMID: 14511157]
[30]
Welsh KA, Breitner JCS, Magruderhabib KM. Detection of dementia in the elderly using telephone screening of cognitive status. Neuropsychiatry Neuropsychol Behav Neurol 1993; 6(2): 103-10.
[31]
Manly JJ, Schupf N, Stern Y, Brickman AM, Tang MX, Mayeux R. Telephone-based identification of mild cognitive impairment and dementia in a multicultural cohort. Arch Neurol 2011; 68(5): 607-14.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1001/archneurol.2011.88] [PMID: 21555635]
[32]
Järvenpää T, Rinne JO, Räihä I, et al. Characteristics of two telephone screens for cognitive impairment. Dement Geriatr Cogn Disord 2002; 13(3): 149-55.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1159/000048646] [PMID: 11893836]
[33]
Desmond DW, Tatemichi TK, Hanzawa L. The telephone interview for cognitive status (tics) - reliability and validity in a stroke sample. Int J Geriatr Psychiatry 1994; 9(10): 803-7.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/gps.930091006]
[34]
Brandt J, Spencer M, Folstein M. The telephone interview for cognitive status. 1988; Vol. 1.
[35]
Johnston D, Samus QM, Morrison A, et al. Identification of community-residing individuals with dementia and their unmet needs for care. Int J Geriatr Psychiatry 2011; 26(3): 292-8.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/gps.2527] [PMID: 20658473]
[36]
Go RC, Duke LW, Harrell LE, et al. Development and validation of a Structured Telephone Interview for Dementia Assessment (STIDA): The NIMH Genetics Initiative. J Geriatr Psychiatry Neurol 1997; 10(4): 161-7.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/089198879701000407] [PMID: 9453683]
[37]
Crooks VC, Clark L, Petitti DB, Chui H, Chiu V. Validation of multi-stage telephone-based identification of cognitive impairment and dementia. BMC Neurol 2005; 5(1): 8.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2377-5-8] [PMID: 15829005]
[38]
Plassman BL, Newman TT, Welsh KA, et al. Properties of the telephone interview for cognitive status: Application in epidemiological and longitudinal studies. Neuropsychiatry Neuropsychol Behav Neurol 1994; 7(3): 235-41.
[39]
Zietemann V, Kopczak A, Müller C, Wollenweber FA, Dichgans M. Validation of the telephone interview of cognitive status and telephone montreal cognitive assessment against detailed cognitive testing and clinical diagnosis of mild cognitive impairment after stroke. Stroke 2017; 48(11): 2952-7.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1161/STROKEAHA.117.017519] [PMID: 29042492]
[40]
Meng C, Zhang X, Zhou J. The telephone interview for cognitive status-modified used in screening cognitive impairment. Chin Ment Health J 2005; 19: 34-7.
[41]
Alexopoulos P, Perneczky R, Cramer B, Grimmer T, Kurz A. Validation of a short telephone test (t3ms) for the diagnosis of cognitive impairment. Fortschr Neurol Psychiatr 2006; 74(6): 329-36.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1055/s-2005-915568] [PMID: 16838400]
[42]
Wong SS, Fong KN. Reliability and validity of the telephone version of the Cantonese Mini-mental State Examination (T-CMMSE) when used with elderly patients with and without dementia in Hong Kong. Int Psychogeriatr 2009; 21(2): 345-53.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S1041610209008588] [PMID: 19243663]
[43]
Roccaforte WH, Burke WJ, Bayer BL, Wengel SP. Reliability and validity of the Short Portable Mental Status Questionnaire administered by telephone. J Geriatr Psychiatry Neurol 1994; 7(1): 33-8.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/089198879400700107] [PMID: 8192828]
[44]
Gatz M, Reynolds C, Nikolic J, Lowe B, Karel M, Pedersen N. An empirical test of telephone screening to identify potential dementia cases. Int Psychogeriatr 1995; 7(3): 429-38.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S1041610295002171] [PMID: 8821350]
[45]
Van Mierlo LD, Wouters H, Sikkes SA, et al. Screening for mild cognitive impairment and dementia with automated, anonymous online and telephone cognitive self-tests. J Alzheimers Dis 2017; 56(1): 249-59.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.3233/JAD-160566] [PMID: 27911296]
[46]
Zhou J, Zhang X, Mundt JC, et al. A comparison of three dementia screening instruments administered by telephone in china. Dementia 2004; 3(1): 69-81.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1471301204039325]
[47]
McDicken JA, Elliott E, Blayney G, et al. VISTA-Cognition Collaborators. Accuracy of the short-form Montreal Cognitive Assessment: Systematic review and validation. Int J Geriatr Psychiatry 2019; 34(10): 1515-25.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/gps.5162] [PMID: 31243810]
[48]
Sachs-Ericsson N, Blazer DG. The new DSM-5 diagnosis of mild neurocognitive disorder and its relation to research in mild cognitive impairment. Aging Ment Health 2015; 19(1): 2-12.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13607863.2014.920303] [PMID: 24914889]
[49]
Ritchie CW, Terrera GM, Quinn TJ. Dementia trials and dementia tribulations: Methodological and analytical challenges in dementia research. Alzheimers Res Ther 2015; 7(1): 31.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13195-015-0113-6] [PMID: 25788988]
[50]
Jorm AF, Jacomb PA. The Informant Questionnaire on Cognitive Decline in the Elderly (IQCODE): Socio-demographic correlates, reliability, validity and some norms. Psychol Med 1989; 19(4): 1015-22.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0033291700005742] [PMID: 2594878]
[51]
Li K, Malhotra PA. Spatial neglect. Pract Neurol 2015; 15(5): 333-9.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/practneurol-2015-001115] [PMID: 26023203]
[52]
Pena MCS, Sobreira EST, Souza CP, Oliveira GN, Tumas V, do Vale FAC. Visuospatial cognitive tests for the evaluation of patients with Parkinson’s disease. Dement Neuropsychol 2008; 2(3): 201-5.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S1980-57642009DN20300007] [PMID: 29213571]
[53]
Salimi S, et al. Can visuospatial measures improve the diagnosis of Alzheimer’s disease? Alzheimer’s Demen (Amsterdam, Netherlands) 2017; 10: 66-74.
[54]
Chen P, Ratcliff G, Belle SH, Cauley JA, DeKosky ST, Ganguli M. Patterns of cognitive decline in presymptomatic Alzheimer disease: A prospective community study. Arch Gen Psychiatry 2001; 58(9): 853-8.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1001/archpsyc.58.9.853] [PMID: 11545668]
[55]
Dupuis K, Pichora-Fuller MK, Chasteen AL, Marchuk V, Singh G, Smith SL. Effects of hearing and vision impairments on the Montreal Cognitive Assessment. Neuropsychol Dev Cogn B Aging Neuropsychol Cogn 2015; 22(4): 413-37.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13825585.2014.968084] [PMID: 25325767]
[56]
Hendry K, Quinn TJ, Evans J, et al. Evaluation of delirium screening tools in geriatric medical inpatients: A diagnostic test accuracy study. Age Ageing 2016; 45(6): 832-7.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ageing/afw130] [PMID: 27503794]
[57]
Brearly TW, Shura RD, Martindale SL, et al. Neuropsychological test administration by videoconference: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Neuropsychol Rev 2017; 27(2): 174-86.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11065-017-9349-1] [PMID: 28623461]
[58]
Chapman JE, Cadilhac DA, Gardner B, et al. Comparing face-to-face and videoconference completion of the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) in community-based survivors of stroke. J Telemed Telecare 2019; 1357633x19890788

Rights & Permissions Print Cite
Article Metrics
207
© 2024 Bentham Science Publishers | Privacy Policy