Study designs of evaluations included in the review
There were no explicit inclusion criteria relating to the study design. The design of each individual included study varied in terms of the sampling procedure employed. Further details were provided in the paper.
Specific interventions included in the review
The screening measures evaluated in the included studies were: the Mini-Mental State Exam (MMSE), the Chinese-Mini Mental State (CMMS), the Cognitive Abilities Screening Instrument (CASI), the Hasegawa Dementia Screening Scale (HDSS), the Blessed Memory-Information Concentration test (MIC Blessed), the Kaztman Orientation Memory Concentration test (OMC), the Mental Status Questionnaire (MSQ), the Short Portable Mental Status Questionnaire (SPMSQ), the Comprehensive Assessment and Referral Evaluation, the Community Screening Interview for Dementia (CSI 'D'), the Crichton Royal Behavioural Rating Scale, the Fuld Object Memory Evaluation, the Storandt Battery, the Kendrick Cognitive Tests, the Informant Questionnaire on Cognitive Decline in the Elderly (IQCODE), the Spanish IQCODE, the Iowa screening battery, the Kahn-Goldfarb Mental Status Questionnaire (MSQ), and the Diagnostic Paradigm.
Reference standard test against which the new test was compared
The review did not include any diagnostic accuracy studies that compared the performance of the index test with a reference standard of diagnosis.
Participants included in the review
Specific inclusion criteria for the participants were not stated. The participants in each of the included studies differed in terms of their race and ethnicity, severity of dementing illness, and the clinical or community setting where the cognitive assessment was performed. Further details were provided in the paper.
Outcomes assessed in the review
Specific inclusion criteria for the outcomes were not stated. The included studies reported a measure of test performance (sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value and negative predictive value) and the recommendations of study investigators.
How were decisions on the relevance of primary studies made?
The authors did not state how the papers were selected for the review, or how many reviewers performed the selection.