首页 | 本学科首页   官方微博 | 高级检索  
检索        


Consensus Approaches to Identify Incident Dementia in Cohort Studies: Systematic Review and Approach in the Successful Aging after Elective Surgery Study
Authors:Eyal Y Kimchi  Tammy T Hshieh  Ray Guo  Bonnie Wong  Margaret O&#x;Connor  Edward R Marcantonio  Eran D Metzger  Jason Strauss  Steven E Arnold  Sharon K Inouye  Tamara G Fong
Institution:1. Department of Neurology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA;2. Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women''s Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA;3. Aging Brain Center, Institute for Aging Research, Hebrew SeniorLife, Boston, MA;4. Department of Psychiatry, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA;5. Department of Neurology, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA;6. Department of Medicine, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA;7. Department of Psychiatry, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA;8. Department of Psychiatry, Cambridge Health Alliance, Cambridge, MA;9. Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA
Abstract:

Objectives

To survey the current methods used to ascertain dementia and mild cognitive impairment (MCI) in longitudinal cohort studies, to categorize differences in approaches and to identify key components of expert panel methodology in current use.

Methods

We searched PubMed for the past 10 years, from March 6, 2007 to March 6, 2017 using a combination of controlled vocabulary and keyword terms to identify expert panel consensus methods used to diagnose MCI or dementia in large cohort studies written in English. From these results, we identified a framework for reporting standards and describe as an exemplar the clinical consensus procedure used in an ongoing study of elective surgery patients (the Successful Aging after Elective Surgery study).

Results

Thirty-one articles representing unique cohorts were included. Among published methods, membership of experts panel varied significantly. There was more similarity in what types of information was use to ascertain disease status. However, information describing the diagnostic decision process and resolution of disagreements was often lacking.

Conclusions

Methods used for expert panel diagnosis of MCI and dementia in large cohort studies are widely variable, and there is a need for more standardized reporting of these approaches. By describing the procedure in which our expert panel achieved consensus diagnoses, we hope to encourage the development and publication of well-founded and reproducible methods for diagnosis of MCI and dementia in longitudinal studies.
Keywords:Consensus  dementia  diagnosis  mild cognitive impairment
本文献已被 ScienceDirect 等数据库收录!
设为首页 | 免责声明 | 关于勤云 | 加入收藏

Copyright©北京勤云科技发展有限公司  京ICP备09084417号