Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-jr42d Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-20T04:28:51.643Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Cross-cultural dementia screening using the Rowland Universal Dementia Assessment Scale: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 March 2020

T. R. Nielsen Open the ORCID record for T. R. Nielsen [Opens in a new window]  and
Kasper Jørgensen
T. R. Nielsen*
Affiliation:
Danish Dementia Research Centre, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark
Kasper Jørgensen
Affiliation:
Danish Dementia Research Centre, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark
*
Correspondence should be addressed to: T. R. Nielsen, Department of Neurology, Danish Dementia Research Center, The Neuroscience Center, University of Copenhagen, Rigshospitalet, section 6922, Blegdamsvej 9, DK-2100Copenhagen Ø, Denmark. Phone: + 45 35 45 71 18; Fax: + 45 35 45 53 23. Email: rune.nielsen@regionh.dk.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Objectives:

To quantitatively synthesize data on the accuracy of the Rowland Universal Dementia Assessment Scale (RUDAS) in different sociocultural settings and compare its performance to other brief screening instruments for the detection of dementia.

Design:

Systematic review and meta-analysis. Literature searches were performed in PubMed, EMBASE, and CINAHL from January 1, 2004 until September 1, 2019.

Setting:

Community, outpatient clinic, and hospital settings in high-, and low- and middle-income countries.

Participants:

Twenty-six studies reporting diagnostic accuracy of the RUDAS were included with almost 4000 participants, including approximately 1700 patients with dementia.

Measurements:

Procedures for translation and cultural adaption of the RUDAS, and influence of demographic variables on diagnostic accuracy, were compared across studies. Bivariate random-effects models were used to pool sensitivity and specificity results, and diagnostic odds-ratios and the area under the hierarchical summary receiver operator characteristic curve were used to present the overall performance.

Results:

The pooled sensitivity and specificity for the detection of dementia were .82 (95% CI, .78–.86) and .83 (95% CI, .78–.87), respectively, with an area under the curve of .89. Subgroup analyses revealed that the RUDAS had comparable diagnostic performances across high-, and low- and middle-income settings (z = .63, P = .53) and in samples with a lower and higher proportion of participants with no formal education (z = −.15, P = .88). In 11 studies making direct comparison, the diagnostic performance of the RUDAS was comparable to that of the Mini-Mental State Examination (z = −.82, P = .41), with areas under the curve of .88 and .84, respectively.

Conclusions:

The RUDAS has good diagnostic performance for detecting dementia in different sociocultural settings. Compared to other brief screening instruments, advantages of the RUDAS include its limited bias in people with limited or no formal education and a minimal need for cultural or language adaptation.

Keywords

Cross-culturalcognitive testingdementiaRowland Universal Dementia Assessment Scalereview and meta-analysis
Type
Review Article
Information
International Psychogeriatrics , Volume 32 , Issue 9: Issue Theme: Enhanced Assessment Instruments for Older Adults with Major Neurocognitive Disorders , September 2020 , pp. 1031 - 1044
Copyright
© International Psychogeriatric Association 2020

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Ayan, G.et al. (2019). Reliability and validity of Rowland Universal Dementia Assessment Scale in Turkish population. American Journal of Alzheimer's Disease & Other Dementias, 34, 34–40.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Basic, D.et al. (2009a). Rowland Universal Dementia Assessment Scale, Mini‐Mental State Examination and General Practitioner Assessment of Cognition in a multicultural cohort of community‐dwelling older persons with early dementia. Australian Psychologist, 44, 40–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Basic, D.et al. (2009b). The validity of the Rowland Universal Dementia Assessment Scale (RUDAS) in a multicultural cohort of community-dwelling older persons with early dementia. Alzheimer Disease and Associated Disorders, 23, 124–129.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chen, C.W.et al. (2015). The reliability, validity, sensitivity, specificity and predictive values of the Chinese version of the Rowland Universal Dementia Assessment Scale. Journal of Clinical Nursing, 24, 3118–3128.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cheung, G.et al. (2015). Performance of three cognitive screening tools in a sample of older New Zealanders. International Psychogeriatrics, 27, 981–989.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chaaya, M.et al. (2016). Validation of the Arabic Rowland Universal Dementia Assessment Scale (A-RUDAS) in elderly with mild and moderate dementia. Aging and Mental Health, 20, 880–887.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Custodio, N.et al. (2019). Validation of the RUDAS in Patients with a Middle-Level Education in Lima, Peru. American Journal of Alzheimer’s Disease & Other Dementias, 34, 513–522.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
de Araujo, N.B., Nielsen, T.R., Engedal, K., Barca, M.L., Coutinho, E.S. and Laks, J. (2018). Diagnosing dementia in lower educated older persons: validation of a Brazilian Portuguese version of the Rowland Universal Dementia Assessment Scale (RUDAS). Brazilian Journal of Psychiatry, 40, 264–269.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Folstein, M.F., Folstein, S.E. and McHugh, P.R. (1975). “Mini-mental state”. A practical method for grading the cognitive state of patients for the clinician. Journal of Psychiatric Research, 12, 189–198.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Glas, A.S., Lijmer, J.G., Prins, M.H., Bonsel, G.J. and Bossuyt, P.M. (2003). The diagnostic odds ratio: a single indicator of test performance. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 56, 1129–1135.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Goncalves, D.C., Arnold, E., Appadurai, K. and Byrne, G.J. (2011). Case finding in dementia: comparative utility of three brief instruments in the memory clinic setting. International Psychogeriatrics, 23, 788–796.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Goudsmit, M., van Campen, J., Schilt, T., Hinnen, C., Franzen, S. and Schmand, B. (2018). One size does not fit all: comparative diagnostic accuracy of the Rowland Universal Dementia Assessment Scale and the mini mental state examination in a memory clinic population with very low education. Dementia and Geriatric Cognitive Disorders Extra, 8, 290–305.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hsieh, S., Schubert, S., Hoon, C., Mioshi, E. and Hodges, J.R. (2013). Validation of the Addenbrooke’s Cognitive Examination III in frontotemporal dementia and Alzheimer’s disease. Dementia and Geriatric Cognitive Disorders, 36, 242–250.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ismail, Z., Rajji, T.K. and Shulman, K.I. (2010). Brief cognitive screening instruments: an update. International Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry, 25, 111–120.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Iype, T., Ajitha, B.K., Antony, P., Ajeeth, N.B., Job, S. and Shaji, K.S. (2006). Usefulness of the Rowland Universal Dementia Assessment Scale in South India. Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery, and Psychiatry, 77, 513–514.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Komalasari, R., Chang, H.C.R. and Traynor, V. (2019). A review of the Rowland Universal Dementia Assessment Scale. Dementia (London), 1471301218820228.Google Scholar
Leeflang, M.M., Deeks, J.J., Gatsonis, C., Bossuyt, P.M. and Cochrane Diagnostic Test Accuracy Working Group. (2008). Systematic reviews of diagnostic test accuracy. Annals of Internal Medicine, 149, 889–897.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Limpawattana, P., Tiamkao, S. and Sawanyawisuth, K. (2012a). The performance of the Rowland Universal Dementia Assessment Scale (RUDAS) for cognitive screening in a geriatric outpatient setting. Aging Clinical and Experimental Research, 24, 495–500.Google Scholar
Limpawattana, P., Tiamkao, S., Sawanyawisuth, K. and Thinkhamrop, B. (2012b). Can Rowland Universal Dementia Assessment Scale (RUDAS) replace Mini-mental State Examination (MMSE) for dementia screening in a Thai geriatric outpatient setting?. American Journal of Alzheimer's Disease & Other Dementias, 27, 254–259.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mateos-Alvarez, R., Ramos-Rios, R. and López-Morinigo, J.D. (2017). Comparative analysis between the MMSE and the RUDAS for dementia screening in low educated people in a Spanish psychogeriatric clinic. The European Journal of Psychiatry, 31, 119–126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Matias-Guiu, J.A., Valles-Salgado, M., Rognoni, T., Hamre-Gil, F., Moreno-Ramos, T. and Matias-Guiu, J. (2017). Comparative diagnostic accuracy of the ACE-III, MIS, MMSE, MoCA, and RUDAS for screening of Alzheimer disease. Dementia and Geriatric Cognitive Disorders, 43, 237–246.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mirza, N., Panagioti, M., Waheed, M.W. and Waheed, W. (2017). Reporting of the translation and cultural adaptation procedures of the Addenbrooke’s Cognitive Examination version III (ACE-III) and its predecessors: a systematic review. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 17, 141.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., Altman, D.G. and Group, P. (2009). Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. BMJ, 339, b2535.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Naqvi, R.M., Haider, S., Tomlinson, G. and Alibhai, S. (2015). Cognitive assessments in multicultural populations using the Rowland Universal Dementia Assessment Scale: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Canadian Medical Association Journal, 187, E169–E175.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nasreddine, Z.S.et al. (2005). The Montreal Cognitive Assessment, MoCA: a brief screening tool for mild cognitive impairment. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society, 53, 695–699.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nielsen, T.R., Andersen, B.B., Gottrup, H., Lutzhoft, J.H., Hogh, P. and Waldemar, G. (2013). Validation of the Rowland Universal Dementia Assessment Scale for multicultural screening in Danish memory clinics. Dementia and Geriatric Cognitive Disorders, 36, 354–362.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nielsen, T.R.et al. (2015). Dementia care for people from ethnic minorities: a Nordic perspective. International Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry, 30, 217–218.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nielsen, T.R., Phung, T.K., Chaaya, M., Mackinnon, A. and Waldemar, G. (2016). Combining the Rowland Universal Dementia Assessment Scale and the Informant Questionnaire on Cognitive Decline in the elderly to improve detection of dementia in an Arabic-speaking population. Dementia and Geriatric Cognitive Disorders, 41, 46–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nielsen, T.R.et al. (2019a). Validation of a brief Multicultural Cognitive Examination (MCE) for evaluation of dementia. International Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry, 34, 982–989.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nielsen, T.R.et al. (2019b). Validation of a European Cross-Cultural Neuropsychological Test Battery (CNTB) for evaluation of dementia. International Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry, 34, 144–152.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nielsen, T.R.et al. (2019c). Validation of the Rowland Universal Dementia Assessment Scale (RUDAS) in a multicultural sample across five Western European countries: diagnostic accuracy and normative data. International Psychogeriatrics, 31, 287–296.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nielsen, T.R., Vogel, A., Gade, A. and Waldemar, G. (2012). Cognitive testing in non-demented Turkish immigrants – comparison of the RUDAS and the MMSE. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 53, 455–460.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
O’Driscoll, C. and Shaikh, M. (2017). Cross-cultural applicability of the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA): a systematic review. Journal of Alzheimer's Disease, 58, 789–801.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Prince, M., Bryce, R., Albanese, E., Wimo, A., Ribeiro, W. and Ferri, C.P. (2013). The global prevalence of dementia: a systematic review and metaanalysis. Alzheimer’s & Dementia, 9, 63–75.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Radford, K.et al. (2015). Comparison of Three Cognitive Screening Tools in Older Urban and Regional Aboriginal Australians. Dementia and Geriatric Cognitive Disorders, 40, 22–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ramos-Ríosa, R., Mateos-Álvareza, R. and López-Moríñigoa, J. (2009). Cribado de demencia en una población con un bajo nivel de instrucción. Validación de la versión española del RUDAS (Rowland Universal Dementia Assessment Scale) en una muestra asistencial.Google Scholar
Reitsma, J.B., Glas, A.S., Rutjes, A.W., Scholten, R.J., Bossuyt, P.M. and Zwinderman, A.H. (2005). Bivariate analysis of sensitivity and specificity produces informative summary measures in diagnostic reviews. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 58, 982–990.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rowland, J.T., Basic, D., Storey, J.E. and Conforti, D.A. (2006). The Rowland Universal Dementia Assessment Scale (RUDAS) and the Folstein MMSE in a multicultural cohort of elderly persons. International Psychogeriatrics, 18, 111–120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rutter, C.M. and Gatsonis, C.A. (2001). A hierarchical regression approach to meta-analysis of diagnostic test accuracy evaluations. Statistics in Medicine, 20, 2865–2884.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Shaaban, J., Aziz, A., Abdullah, Z. and Ab Razak, A. (2013). Validation of the Malay Version of Rowland Universal Dementia Assessment Scale (MRUDAS) among elderly attending primary care clinic. International Medical Journal, 20, 1–4.Google Scholar
Silpakit, O., Chomchuen, S. and Kittipongpisal, S. (2018). The diagnostic accuracy of the Thai dementia screening scale for primary care in the community. Neurology Asia, 23, 333–341.Google Scholar
Steis, M.R. and Schrauf, R.W. (2009). A review of translations and adaptations of the Mini-Mental State Examination in languages other than English and Spanish. Research in Gerontological Nursing, 2, 214–224.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Storey, J.E., Rowland, J.T., Basic, D., Conforti, D.A. and Dickson, H.G. (2004). The Rowland Universal Dementia Assessment Scale (RUDAS): a multicultural cognitive assessment scale. International Psychogeriatrics, 16, 13–31.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Whiting, P.F.et al. (2011). QUADAS-2: a revised tool for the quality assessment of diagnostic accuracy studies. Annals of Internal Medicine, 155, 529–536.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Zhou, Y. and Dendukuri, N. (2014). Statistics for quantifying heterogeneity in univariate and bivariate meta-analyses of binary data: the case of meta-analyses of diagnostic accuracy. Statistics in Medicine, 33, 2701–2717.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Supplementary material: File

Nielsen and Jørgensen supplementary material

Nielsen and Jørgensen supplementary material

Download Nielsen and Jørgensen supplementary material(File)
File 63.6 KB