Abstract
BackgroundNeuropsychological performance has a strong impact on real-life functioning and clinical outcomes in psychosis. However, conducting lengthy cognitive assessments may not be feasible in routine clinical practice. Brief, reliable and cost-effective tools are highly needed, but few studies are available to guide clinician choice. MethodsThe purpose of this study was to compare the performance of two widely used, short instruments: the Screen for Cognitive Impairment in Psychiatry (SCIP) and the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA). These instruments were validated in a sample of patients with psychotic disorders and healthy controls, using the Repeatable Battery for the Assessment of Neuropsychological Status (RBANS) and other instruments to assess executive functions, as comparators. ResultsPatients fared worse than controls across almost all cognitive domains, with effect sizes ranging from 0 (MoCA naming) to 2.08 (SCIP total). Receiver Operator Curve analysis of patient and control performance suggested a better convergent validity for the SCIP (total score AUC: 0.85; 95%CI: 0.79–0.90; Se: 76%, Sp: 83%, PPV: 85%, NPV: 73%) than the MoCA (AUC: 0.78; 95%CI: 0.72–0.85; Se: 69%, Sp: 76%, PPV: 78.7%, NPV 66%). ConclusionsThe Screen for Cognitive Impairment in Psychiatry seems to be a more sensitive and specific screening tool than the MoCA to identify cognitive impairment among patients with psychotic disorders.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
