This is the authors' abstract. We don't add key points for this paper.
Objective The objective of this study was to compare the reliability of the Mini-Mental State Examination with that of a new Standardized Mini-Mental State Examination, which has expanded guidelines for administration and scoring. Method The subjects were 32 stable elderly residents of a nursing home and 16 elderly residents of a chronic care hospital unit. Six raters administered the Folstein Mini-Mental State to 22 of these stable elderly subjects, and five raters administered the standardized version to 26 of these subjects. Each subject was tested on three different occasions 1 week apart. Each rater tested 4-6 subjects at the first and third weeks and 4-6 different subjects at the second week. The analytic technique used was one-way analysis of variance to estimate the interrater variance and the intrarater variance. Results The intrarater variance on all occasions was reduced by 86% and the interrater variance was reduced by 76% when the Standardized Mini-Mental State was used; the reductions in variance were significant (p less than 0.003). The intraclass correlation for the Mini-Mental State was 0.69; for the standardized version it was 0.90. It took less time to administer the Standardized Mini-Mental State than the Mini-Mental State. Conclusions The Standardized Mini-Mental State had better reliability than the Mini-Mental State in this study group. Although the improved reliability of the Standardized Mini-Mental State was achieved by reducing measurement noise, this advantage would likely occur in a broad spectrum of patients.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Molloy et al. (1991) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: