↓ Skip to main content

A novel language-neutral Visual Cognitive Assessment Test (VCAT): validation in four Southeast Asian countries

Overview of attention for article published in Alzheimer's Research & Therapy, January 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
16 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
65 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
A novel language-neutral Visual Cognitive Assessment Test (VCAT): validation in four Southeast Asian countries
Published in
Alzheimer's Research & Therapy, January 2018
DOI 10.1186/s13195-017-0333-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Levinia Lim, Tze Pin Ng, Anam Paulus Ong, Maw Pin Tan, Alvin Rae Cenina, Qi Gao, Adeline Ng, Nagaendran Kandiah

Abstract

Cognitive screeners are imperative for early diagnosis of dementia. The Visual Cognitive Assessment Test (VCAT) is a language-neutral, visual-based test which has proven useful for a multilingual population in a single-center study. However, its performance utility is unknown in a wider and more diverse Southeast Asian cohort. We recruited 164 healthy controls (HC) and 120 cognitively impaired (CI) subjects- 47 mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and 73 mild Alzheimer's disease (AD) dementia participants, from four countries between January 2015 and August 2016 to determine the usefulness of a single version of the VCAT, without translation or adaptation, in a multinational, multilingual population. The VCAT was administered along with established cognitive evaluation. The VCAT, without local translation or adaptation, was effective in discriminating between HC and CI subjects (MCI and mild AD dementia). Mean (SD) VCAT scores for HC and CI subjects were 22.48 (3.50) and 14.17 (5.05) respectively. Areas under the curve for Montreal Cognitive Assessment (0.916, 95% CI 0.884-0.948) and the VCAT (0.905, 95% CI 0.870-0.940) in discriminating between HCs and CIs were comparable. The multiple languages used to administer VCAT in four countries did not significantly influence test scores. The VCAT without the need for language translation or cultural adaptation showed satisfactory discriminative ability and was effective in a multinational, multilingual Southeast Asian population.

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 65 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 65 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 9 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 9%
Student > Bachelor 5 8%
Student > Master 4 6%
Other 3 5%
Other 14 22%
Unknown 24 37%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 20 31%
Psychology 7 11%
Neuroscience 4 6%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 5%
Social Sciences 3 5%
Other 6 9%
Unknown 22 34%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 14 February 2018.
All research outputs
#15,492,327
of 23,023,224 outputs
Outputs from Alzheimer's Research & Therapy
#1,131
of 1,243 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#270,083
of 441,086 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Alzheimer's Research & Therapy
#20
of 33 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,023,224 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,243 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 25.9. This one is in the 6th percentile – i.e., 6% 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 441,086 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 29th percentile – i.e., 29% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 33 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.