We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
The Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) is a popular and simple-to-administer screening instrument to detect cognitive impairment. The MoCA generates a total score and six domain-specific index scores: (1) Memory, (2) Executive Functioning, (3) Attention, (4) Language, (5) Visuospatial, and (6) Orientation. It is unclear whether these MoCA scores can differentiate between distinct clinical dementia syndromes. This study compared MoCA Index scores between amnestic dementia of the Alzheimer’s type (DAT) and primary progressive aphasia (PPA), a language-based dementia.
Method:
Baseline MoCA data were analyzed from 33 DAT, 37 PPA, and 83 cognitively normal individuals enrolled in the Clinical Core of the Northwestern Alzheimer’s Disease Center. A one-way analysis of covariance adjusted for age was used to compare MoCA scores among groups. A logistic regression model was implemented to observe individual likelihood of group affiliation based on MoCA Index scores.
Results:
The mean MoCA total score was significantly higher in controls compared to both patient groups (p < .001) but did not differ between DAT and PPA groups. However, in accordance with salient clinical features commonly observed in DAT versus PPA, Memory and Orientation Index scores were lowest in the DAT group (p < .001), whereas Language and Attention Index scores were lowest in the PPA group (p < .001). Multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that the individual effects of Memory (p = .001), Language (p = .002), and Orientation (p = .025) Indices were significant.
Conclusions:
MoCA Index scores can help differentiate among distinct cognitive syndromes, suggesting it may be a useful brief screening tool to detect domain-specific cognitive impairment.
Recommend this
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.