Searching the Resource Information Network
Are you sure you want to leave this community? Leaving the community will revoke any permissions you have been granted in this community.
As populations age and the prevalence of cognitive impairment increases, healthcare professionals and researchers require short, validated cognitive screening instruments (CSIs). As part the EIP-on-AHA Twinning Support Scheme (2016), four reference sites developed the RAPid COmmunity COGnitive screening Programme (RAPCOG) twinning project to validate translated versions of the Quick Mild Cognitive Impairment (Qmci) screen that could be adapted quickly for use with future eHealth screening and assessment programmes. Here we present the cultural adaption and translation of the Qmci-Portuguese (Qmci-P) screen as part of RAPCOG and explore its subsequent validation against two commonly-used CSIs (MMSE-P and MoCA-P) with 93 participants aged ≥65, attending ten day care centres or resident in two long-term care institutions; median age 74 (+/-15), 66% female. The Qmci-P's internal consistency was high (Cronbach's Alpha 0.82), compared with the MoCA (0.79) and SMMSE (0.54). Qmci-P screen scores moderately correlated with the SMMSE (r=0.61, 95% CI:0.45-0.72, p<0.001) and MoCA (r=0.63, 95% CI:0.36-0.80, p<0.001). The Qmci-P screen demonstrates high internal consistency and concurrent validity against more established CSIs and given its brevity (3-5mins), may be preferable for use in community settings. This project shows the potential of the EIP-on-AHA Twinning initiative to promote the scaling-up of innovative good practices.
Pubmed ID: 31360671
Publication data is provided by the National Library of Medicine ® and PubMed ®. Data is retrieved from PubMed ® on a weekly schedule. For terms and conditions see the National Library of Medicine Terms and Conditions.
The Museum of Comparative Anthropogeny (MOCA) is a collection of comparative information regarding humans and our closest evolutionary cousins (chimpanzees, bonobos, gorillas and orangutans i.e, great apes), with an emphasis on uniquely human features. MOCA is organized by Domains, each grouping Topics by areas of interest and scientific discipline. Each topic entry will eventually cover existing information about a particular difference (alleged or documented) between humans and non-human hominids. Comparisons of these non-human hominids with humans are difficult, as so little is known about their phenotypic features (phenomes), in contrast to humans. Ethical, fiscal and practical issues also limit collection of further information about great apes. MOCA attempts to collect existing information about human-specific differences from great apes, currently scattered in the literature. Having such information in one location could lead to new insights and multi-disciplinary interactions, and to ethically-sound studies to explain differences, and uniquely human specializations. MOCA is not targeted at experts in specific disciplines, but rather aims to communicate basic information to a broad audience of scientists from many backgrounds, and to the interested lay public. MOCA includes not only aspects wherein there are known or apparent differences between humans and great apes, but additionally, topics for which popular wisdom about claimed or assumed differences is not entirely correct. It is for all these reasons that MOCA is called a Museum, and not an Encyclopedia or Database.
View all literature mentions