Psychometrics of the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) and its subscales: validation of the Taiwanese version of the MoCA and an item response theory analysis

International Psychogeriatrics - Tập 24 Số 4 - Trang 651-658 - 2012
Chia-Fen Tsai1, Wei‐Ju Lee, Shuu‐Jiun Wang, Ben‐Chang Shia, Ziad Nasreddine, Jong‐Ling Fuh
1Department of Psychiatry, Neurological Institute, Veterans General Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan.

Tóm tắt

ABSTRACTBackground: The Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) is an instrument for screening mild cognitive impairment (MCI). This study examined the psychometric properties and the validity of the Taiwan version of the MoCA (MoCA-T) in an elderly outpatient population.Methods: Participants completed the MoCA-T, Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE), and the Chinese Version Verbal Learning Test. The diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease (AD) was made based on the NINCDS-ADRDA criteria, and MCI was diagnosed through the criteria proposed by Petersen et al. (2001).Results: Data were collected from 207 participants (115 males/92 females, mean age: 77.3 ± 7.5 years). Ninety-eight participants were diagnosed with AD, 71 with MCI, and 38 were normal controls. The area under the receiver operator curves (AUC) for predicting AD was 0.98 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.97–1.00) for the MMSE, and 0.99 (95% CI = 0.98–1.00) for the MoCA-T. The AUC for predicting MCI was 0.81 (95% CI = 0.72–0.89) using the MMSE and 0.91 (95% CI = 0.86–1.00) using the MoCA-T. Using an optimal cut-off score of 23/24, the MoCA-T had a sensitivity of 92% and specificity of 78% for MCI. Item response theory analysis indicated that the level of information provided by each subtest of the MoCA-T was consistent. The frontal and language subscales provided higher discriminating power than the other subscales in the detection of MCI.Conclusion: Compared to the MMSE, the MoCA-T provides better psychometric properties in the detection of MCI. The utility of the MoCA-T is optimal in mild to moderate cognitive dysfunction.

Từ khóa


Tài liệu tham khảo

10.1037/a0021134

10.1017/S1355617709991184

10.1016/S0028-3932(99)00079-2

10.1212/WNL.34.7.939

10.1001/archneur.58.12.1985

10.1159/000095303

10.2466/pms.1958.8.3.271

10.1002/1097-4679(199311)49:6<883::AID-JCLP2270490616>3.0.CO;2-6

10.1177/0013164406288171

10.1111/j.1365-2796.2004.01388.x

10.1002/mds.22017

10.1097/WNN.0b013e31815e6254

10.1212/01.wnl.0000344650.95823.03

10.1111/j.1532-5415.2005.53221.x

10.1111/j.1447-0594.2010.00585.x

10.1001/archneur.56.3.303

10.1007/s00520-008-0431-3

10.1017/S1041610204000092

10.1186/1742-2094-5-2

10.1207/S15324826AN0904_4

10.1016/0022-3956(75)90026-6

10.1080/13607863.2010.536133

10.1159/000232589

10.1080/13825589608256619

Hambleton, 1991, Fundamentals of Item Response Theory

10.1037/a0020919

Oishi, 2007, Oxford Handbook of Methods in Positive Psychology, 126

10.1177/0891988708316855

Emberson, 2000, Item Response Theory for Psychologists

10.1016/S1474-4422(04)00710-0

Thông tin
Thông tin xuất bản

International Psychogeriatrics

Tập 24 Số 4

651-658

Thông tin tác giả