Article Text

Download PDFPDF
  1. Alex Wojtowicz,
  2. Andrew Larner
  1. The Walton Centre


Objective To examine scoring errors in cognitive screening instruments administered to patients in primary care who were then subsequently referred to a secondary care cognitive disorders clinic.

Results Of 328 consecutive new referrals seen over 12 months (January–December 2015), 246 (75%) were from primary care, of whom 93 (37.8%) had been administered a cognitive screening instrument according to their referral letter: the most common were 6CIT (38), MMSE (30), and GPCOG (22). Using a simple ad hoc classification system (Neurodegen Dis Manag 2015;5:505–10), reported primary care test results were classified as unequivocal, ambiguous/incorrect, or incomplete.

Percentages falling into the latter two categories, which may reflect incorrect test use, were 6CIT 26%, MMSE 13%, and GPCOG 32%. 6CIT errors were mostly related to its negative scoring system; GPCOG errors were mostly related to ambiguity over the separate patient and informant components of the test.

Conclusions In this pragmatic survey, scoring errors were evident in around a quarter of patients administered cognitive screening instruments in primary care; the fraction may be higher in those administered tests (6CIT, GPCOG) specifically designed for use in primary care settings.

Statistics from

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.