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
Meta-Analysis
. 2021 Feb;36(2):239-251.
doi: 10.1002/gps.5436. Epub 2020 Oct 9.

Diagnostic accuracy of the Clinical Dementia Rating Scale for detecting mild cognitive impairment and dementia: A bivariate meta-analysis

Hui-Chuan Huang  1 , Yu-Min Tseng  1 , Yi-Chun Chen  2 , Pin-Yuan Chen  3   4 , Hsiao-Yean Chiu  1   5
Affiliations
Meta-Analysis

Diagnostic accuracy of the Clinical Dementia Rating Scale for detecting mild cognitive impairment and dementia: A bivariate meta-analysis

Hui-Chuan Huang et al. Int J Geriatr Psychiatry. 2021 Feb.

Abstract

Objective: The Clinical Dementia Rating (CDR) Scale comprising global score (CDR-GS) and sum of boxes scores (CDR-SB) is commonly used in staging cognitive impairment; however, its diagnostic accuracy is not well clarified. The meta-analysis aimed to investigate the diagnostic accuracy of the CDR for mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and dementia in older populations.

Methods: Studies examining the diagnostic accuracy of the CDR for MCI or dementia against reference standards were included from seven electronic databases. The bivariate analysis with a random-effects model was adopted to calculate the pooled sensitivity and specificity of the CDR for MCI and dementia.

Results: Fifteen studies investigating the diagnostic accuracy of the CDR-GS (n = 13) or CDR-SB (n = 5) for MCI or dementia were included. The pooled sensitivity and specificity of the CDR-GS for MCI were 93% and 97%, respectively. With respect to dementia, the CDR-GS had superior pooled specificity compared to the CDR-SB (99% vs. 94%), while similar sensitivities were found between the CDR-GS and CDR-SB (both 87%). Significant moderators of an old age, a high educational level, a high prevalence of MCI or dementia, being in a developing country, and a lack of informants' observations may affect the estimation of the sensitivity or specificity of the CDR.

Conclusions: Evidence supports the CDR being useful for detecting MCI and dementia; applying the CDR for staging cognitive impairment in at risk populations should be considered. Furthermore, including objective observations from relevant informants or proxies to increase the accuracy of the CDR for dementia is suggested.

Keywords: Clinical Dementia Rating Scale; dementia; meta-analysis; mild cognitive impairment.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

REFERENCES

    1. Prince M, Bryce R, Albanese E, Wimo A, Ribeiro W, Ferri CP. The global prevalence of dementia: a systematic review and metaanalysis. Alzheimers Dement. 2013;9(1):63-75.e62.
    1. Qiu C, Kivipelto M, von Strauss E. Epidemiology of Alzheimer's disease: occurrence, determinants, and strategies toward intervention. Dialogues Clin Neurosci. 2009;11(2):111-128.
    1. Miranda-Castillo C, Woods B, Galboda K, Oomman S, Olojugba C, Orrell M. Unmet needs, quality of life and support networks of people with dementia living at home. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2010;8:132.
    1. Brodaty H, Donkin M. Family caregivers of people with dementia. Dialogues Clin Neurosci. 2009;11(2):217-228.
    1. Kelley AS, McGarry K, Gorges R, Skinner JS. The burden of health care costs for patients with dementia in the last 5 years of life. Ann Intern Med. 2015;163(10):729-736.

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources