↓ Skip to main content

Sensitivity and Specificity of a Five-Minute Cognitive Screening Test in Patients With Heart Failure

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Cardiac Failure, September 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (59th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
f1000
1 research highlight platform

Citations

dimensions_citation
20 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
57 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Sensitivity and Specificity of a Five-Minute Cognitive Screening Test in Patients With Heart Failure
Published in
Journal of Cardiac Failure, September 2015
DOI 10.1016/j.cardfail.2015.08.343
Pubmed ID
Authors

Janette D. Cameron, Robyn Gallagher, Susan J. Pressler, Skye N. McLennan, Chantal F. Ski, Geoffrey Tofler, David R. Thompson

Abstract

Cognitive impairment occurs in up to 80% of heart failure (HF) patients. The National Institute for Neurological Disorders and Stroke (NINDS) and the Canadian Stroke Network (CSN) recommend a five-minute cognitive screening protocol, yet to be psychometrically evaluated in HF populations. To conduct a secondary analysis of the sensitivity and specificity of the NINDS-CSN brief cognitive screening protocol in HF patients. The Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) was administered to 221 HF patients. The NINDS-CSN screen comprises three MoCA items; lower scores indicating poorer cognitive function. Receiver operator characteristic (ROC) curves were constructed, determining the sensitivity, specificity and appropriate cut-off scores of the NINDS-CSN screen. In a HF population aged 76±12 years, 136 (62%) were characterised with cognitive impairment (MoCA <26). Scores on the NINDS-CSN screen ranged from 3-11. The area under the ROC curve indicated good accuracy in screening for cognitive impairment (0.88, p<0.01, 95% CI 0.83 to 0.92). The cut-off score ≤9 provided 89% sensitivity and 71% specificity. The NINDS-CSN protocol offers clinicians a feasible telephone method to screen for cognitive impairment in HF patients. Future studies should include a neuropsychological battery to more comprehensively examine the diagnostic accuracy of brief cognitive screening protocols.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 57 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 57 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 19%
Student > Master 9 16%
Researcher 6 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 7%
Unspecified 4 7%
Other 11 19%
Unknown 12 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 12 21%
Psychology 11 19%
Nursing and Health Professions 8 14%
Unspecified 4 7%
Social Sciences 3 5%
Other 6 11%
Unknown 13 23%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 17 February 2016.
All research outputs
#15,169,543
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Cardiac Failure
#1,412
of 2,027 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#138,666
of 284,411 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Cardiac Failure
#8
of 22 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,027 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.5. This one is in the 29th percentile – i.e., 29% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 284,411 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 22 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 59% of its contemporaries.