Premium
Characteristics of currently available informant‐based tools to obtain collateral information for diagnosis and monitoring of cognitive disorders
Author(s) -
Choudhury Samira
Publication year - 2020
Publication title -
alzheimer's and dementia
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 6.713
H-Index - 118
eISSN - 1552-5279
pISSN - 1552-5260
DOI - 10.1002/alz.047180
Subject(s) - psycinfo , checklist , medline , dementia , cognition , neurocognitive , rating scale , clinical psychology , scale (ratio) , medicine , clinical dementia rating , psychology , psychiatry , cognitive impairment , developmental psychology , pathology , physics , disease , quantum mechanics , political science , law , cognitive psychology
Background To systematically review literature on informant based tools for the diagnosis and monitoring of neurocognitive disorders and make evidence based recommendations to clinicians and researchers as part of the 5th Canadian Consensus Conferences on the Diagnosis and Treatment of Dementia. Method A systematic search was performed in MEDLINE, PsycINFO, Cochrane, and EMBASE databases. Limits used for searches were humans, English, and age above 45. Articles that validated the tools and or described their key properties were included. The original search yielded 358 articles. After removing duplicates and reviewing titles and abstracts, 167 remained and were reviewed in full text. Eventually 92 articles that described 16 informant based tools were included for final review. Result Based on comprehensiveness and validity, 8 tools were found to be preferable for clinical and research use. AD8; Dementia Severity Rating Scale (DSRS); Everyday Cognition Scale (ECog); and the Informant Questionnaire on Cognitive Decline in the Elderly (IQCODE) were selected for cognition and function and the Neuropsychiatric Inventory (NPI); Neuropsychiatric Inventory Questionnaire (NPI‐Q); Neuropsychiatric Inventory Clinician Rating scale (NPI‐C); and the Mild Behavior Impairment Checklist (MBI‐C) were selected for behaviour. Clinicians and researchers should choose a specific tool based on the need for comprehensive assessment versus desired efficiency depending on the setting. Conclusion There are a number of evidence based tools that are appropriate to use in clinical care and research settings to assess cognition, behavior and function. Tools can be chosen based on specific needs and available resources.