The clock drawing test: A systematic review and meta‐analysis of diagnostic accuracy

Abstract

Aim:The aim of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of the clock drawing test and to compare its scoring methods.Background: Dementia refers to a symptom where an adult demonstrates memory disorder and cognitive impairment. Early diagnosis of dementia is very important for medication management and prognosis. The clock drawing test is one of the most used cognitive screening tools for dementia. However, due to its scoring system, the accuracy of the clock drawing test remains a topic of debate. Design:A systematic review with meta-analysis following Cochrane's methods and the guidelines of the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. Data sources: A literature search was carried out in the OVID-MEDLINE, OVID-EMBASE and OVID-PsycINFO databases (27 October 2015).Review method: The quality assessment of diagnostic accuracy studies (QUADAS-2) tool was employed for this review. We used hierarchical regression models to pool the values of diagnostic accuracy in a random effects model. Results:A total of 18 studies with 5,531 participants were identified for this review. Fifteen of these studies were included for meta-analysis according to each scoring system. The pooled sensitivity and specificity of the clock drawing test using the Shulman system were 82% and 75.7% respectively. In the Sunderland system, these were 72.6% and 87.9% respectively. Conclusions:The findings indicate that the accuracy of the clock drawing test using the Shulman system was the most studied and highly sensitive. After gaining a better understanding of the clock drawing test through this study, we recommend it for widespread use in the diagnosis of dementia. K E Y W O R D Sclock drawing test, cognitive impairment, dementia, diagnostic accuracy, literature review, meta-analysis, sensitivity, specificity, systematic review

Cognitive screening instruments to identify vascular cognitive impairment: A systematic review

“…The CLOX1 free drawing variant, sensitive to executive control and useful in early impairment, showed the highest accuracy (AUC 0.83) of all CDTs in identifying VaD but even when combined with cube drawing had poor accuracy for VMCI (AUC 0.66), similar to other versions of the CDT . This is in keeping with the finding of a recent systematic review and meta‐analysis, albeit that paper did not specifically examine diagnostic accuracy of CDTs in VCI . The CDT had the highest sensitivity (93.3%) and reasonable accuracy (AUC 0.74) in separating VaD from AD, supporting evidence that it is useful as a brief stand‐alone CSI for this purpose .…”

Predicting Non-elective hospital readmission or Death using a Composite Assessment of Cognitive and Physical Frailty in Elderly inpatients with Cardiovascular Disease

“…However, the MMSE is language-based and considered to be influenced by the level of education. The CDT is one of the most widely used cognitive screening instruments for dementia [26], and it can be performed without being influenced by the patient's level of language or education and is less affected by depression than other tests [27]. To our knowledge, the present study is the first to formally assess the MMSE + CDT as a predictor of clinically relevant outcomes in patients with CVD.…”

“…The AUC value obtained for MMSE + CDT in all patients was 0.59. The CDT and MMSE reflect different cognitive characteristics, which may have affected the results [37]. The MMSE and CDT are both relatively fast, simple, and useful tools for screening cognitive impairment.…”

Predicting Non-elective hospital readmission or Death using a Composite Assessment of Cognitive and Physical Frailty in Elderly inpatients with Cardiovascular Disease

“…However, the MMSE is language-based and considered to be influenced by the level of education. The CDT is one of the most widely used cognitive screening instruments for dementia [28], and it can be performed without being influenced by the patient's level of language or education and is less affected by depression than other tests [29]. To our knowledge, the present study is the first to formally assess the MMSE + CDT as a predictor of clinically relevant outcomes in patients with CVD.…”