ライフサイエンスコーパス: dementia rating scale

1 f dementia severity measured by the Clinical Dementia Rating Scale.

2 up assessments were obtained with the Mattis Dementia Rating Scale.

3 for dementia severity by using the Clinical Dementia Rating Scale.

4 alidated proxy measure, the Modified Blessed Dementia Rating Scale.

5 sychopathology rating scales, and the Mattis Dementia Rating Scale.

6 Mental State Examination (MMSE) and Clinical Dementia Rating scale.

7 ases was also done by employing the Clinical Dementia Rating Scale.

8 y Mini-Mental State Examination and Clinical Dementia Rating scales.

9 ore, 1-step worsening on the global Clinical Dementia Rating scale, 15-point decline on the ADCS acti

10 gnitive status was evaluated with the Mattis Dementia Rating Scale-2 (DRS) at baseline and on annual

11 -Mental State Examination (MMSE), the Mattis Dementia Rating Scale-2 (DRS-2), and the Clinical Dement

12 ted subjects were assessed annually with the Dementia Rating Scale-2 for two additional years.

13 Rating Scale-2, and new robust and expanded Dementia Rating Scale-2 norms were applied to cognitivel

14 onance imaging brain scans and completed the Dementia Rating Scale-2, and new robust and expanded Dem

15 nce of deficits demonstrated on the Clinical Dementia Rating scale (45% vs 19%; P = .12).

16 and a positive association with the Clinical Dementia Rating Scale (a global functional assessment).

17 e was a negative association with the Mattis Dementia Rating Scale (a global measure of cognition) an

18 eline and every 15 months using the Clinical Dementia Rating scale, a neurological evaluation, and ne

19 nalysis of covariance adjusting for baseline Dementia Rating Scale, age, gender, magnetic resonance f

20 annually for up to 4 years with the Clinical Dementia Rating scale and a battery of neuropsychologica

21 rogate interviews using the Modified Blessed Dementia Rating Scale and a review of medical records.

22 The Dementia Rating Scale and Frontal Assessment Battery wer

23 rders were administered the UPSA, the Mattis Dementia Rating Scale, and standardized measures of psyc

24 -Mental State Examination (MMSE), the Mattis Dementia Rating Scale, and the Executive Interview.

25 tiation/perseveration subscore of the Mattis Dementia Rating Scale, and the latency of the P300 audit

26 Patients were assessed by the Clinical Dementia Rating scale (CDR) to have no dementia or quest

27 Geriatric Depression Scale and the Clinical Dementia Rating Scale (CDR).

28 tia Rating Scale-2 (DRS-2), and the Clinical Dementia Rating Scale (CDR).

29 uded 468 healthy older individuals (Clinical Dementia Rating scale [CDR] global scores of 0, above cu

30 ysfunction and memory were assessed with the Dementia Rating Scale, disability and social support wer

31 rment at baseline, performance on the Mattis Dementia Rating Scale domains of conceptualization and i

32 nically healthy older participants (Clinical Dementia Rating Scale global scores of 0) participating

33 For the Dementia Rating Scale impairment was observed in approxi

34 tionship of age to performance on the Mattis Dementia Rating Scale in 116 outpatients with schizophre

35 ender, magnetic resonance field strength and Dementia Rating Scale interval.

36 with total and subscale scores on the Mattis Dementia Rating Scale, level of independence in the comm

37 ment at 12 months, as measured by the Mattis Dementia Rating Scale (MDRS).

38 Lower scores on the Mattis Dementia Rating Scale memory subscale and more severe ne

39 Dementia Rating Scale (p = 0.0041) or Mattis Dementia Rating Scale (p = 0.0031) scores.

40 increased serum ACT correlated with Clinical Dementia Rating Scale (p = 0.0041) or Mattis Dementia Ra

41 provement, stable or reliable decline) using Dementia Rating Scale reliable change indices determined

42 rebrospinal fluid correlated with the Mattis Dementia Rating Scale score (Pearson r = 0.50; P = .03)

43 nation score of 17 or less, baseline Blessed Dementia Rating Scale score of 5.0 or greater, presence

44 menting disorders, the mean (+/-SD) Clinical Dementia Rating Scale score was 2.21 (+/-1.14), with 43

45 ients of differing dementia severity (Mattis Dementia Rating Scale score, 23-128) and in 14 age-match

46 Mini-Mental State Examination score, Blessed Dementia Rating Scale score, duration since reported ons

47 disease patients with a wide range of Mattis Dementia Rating Scale scores (23-128).

48 waves were negatively correlated with Mattis Dementia Rating Scale scores for initiation/perseveratio

49 The higher Clinical Dementia Rating Scale scores lacked correlation with neu

50 Dementia Rating Scale scores were lower in the schizophr

51 Clinical Dementia Rating scale scores were significantly related

52 cognitive profiles of the two groups on the Dementia Rating Scale subscales were identical, with the

53 ion level was associated with lower Clinical Dementia Rating Scale sum of boxes (beta = -0.19; P < .0

54 plaques were associated with higher Clinical Dementia Rating Scale sum of boxes (beta = 1.64; P < .00

55 neuropsychological measures and the Clinical Dementia Rating scale sum of boxes (CDRsb).

56 ement in slope in rate of change of Clinical Dementia Rating Scale sum of boxes has 89% power when al

57 standard clinical instruments: the Clinical Dementia Rating Scale sum of boxes, a verbal memory test

58 tein Mini-Mental State Examination, Clinical Dementia Rating Scale Sum of Boxes, Logical Memory Immed

59 ange, 0-30, with 30 being best) and Clinical Dementia Rating scale sum-of-boxes scale (range, 0-18, w

60 t as measured with the MMSE and the Clinical Dementia Rating scale sum-of-boxes score.

61 ndary outcome measures included the Clinical Dementia Rating scale sum-of-boxes, the Neuropsychiatric

62 and greater worsening over time in Clinical Dementia Rating Scale, sum of boxes (P = 0.02).

63 bjects on the MMSE (N=8, 44%) and the Mattis Dementia Rating Scale total (N=10, 56%).

64 tiation-perseveration subscale of the Mattis Dementia Rating Scale, Trail Making tests A and B, and D

65 Longitudinally, decline in the Clinician's Dementia Rating scale was correlated with decline in mag

66 ni-Mental State Examination and the Clinical Dementia Rating scale, was detected 5 years before expec

67 hological evaluation, including the Clinical Dementia Rating scale, was performed.

68 ferences, with the exception of the Clinical Dementia Rating Scale, which suggested worsening among p