Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2017 Jul 18;7(2):249-256.
doi: 10.1159/000478008. eCollection 2017 May-Aug.

Assessing Capacity in the Elderly: Comparing the MoCA with a Novel Computerized Battery of Executive Function

Megan Brenkel  1 , Kenneth Shulman  1 , Elias Hazan  1 , Nathan Herrmann  1 , Adrian M Owen  1   2
Affiliations

Assessing Capacity in the Elderly: Comparing the MoCA with a Novel Computerized Battery of Executive Function

Megan Brenkel et al. Dement Geriatr Cogn Dis Extra. .

Abstract

Background/aims: Clinicians are increasingly being asked to provide their opinion on the decision-making capacity of older adults, while validated and widely available tools are lacking. We sought to identify an online cognitive screening tool for assessing mental capacity through the measurement of executive function.

Methods: A mixed elderly sample of 45 individuals, aged 65 years and older, were screened with the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) and the modified Cambridge Brain Sciences Battery.

Results: Two computerized tests from the Cambridge Brain Sciences Battery were shown to provide information over and above that obtained with a standard cognitive screening tool, correctly sorting the majority of individuals with borderline MoCA scores.

Conclusions: The brief computerized battery should be used in conjunction with standard tests such as the MoCA in order to differentiate cognitively intact from cognitively impaired older adults.

Keywords: Cambridge Brain Sciences Battery; Capacity assessment; Executive function; Montreal Cognitive Assessment.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Group_MoCA versus test 5 (Hampshire Tree Task). Note that the tests had to be converted to Z-scores in order to compare them on an equivalent scale.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Marson DC, Sawrie SM, Snyder S, McInturff B, Stalvey T, Boothe A, Aldridge T, Chatterjee A, Harrell LE. Assessing financial capacity in patients with Alzheimer disease: a conceptual model and prototype instrument. Arch Neurol. 2000;57:877–884. - PubMed
    1. 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;12:189–198. - PubMed
    1. Nasreddine ZS, Phillips NA, Bédirian V, Charbonneau S, Whitehead V, Collin I, Cummings JL, Chertkow H. The Montreal Cognitive Assessment, MoCA: a brief screening tool for mild cognitive impairment. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2005;53:695–699. - PubMed
    1. Frost M, Lawson S, Jacoby R. Testamentary Capacity: Law, Practice, and Medicine. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2015.
    1. Smith T, Gildeh N, Holmes C. The Montreal Cognitive Assessment: validity and utility in a memory clinic setting. Can J Psychiatry. 2007;52:329–332. - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources