ライフサイエンスコーパス: MMSE

1 MMSE (score and items) did not discriminate patients wit

2 MMSE has been used in hepatology but its usefulness in t

3 MMSE positively covaried with metabolism in the left sup

4 MMSE, RPM, AVLT, DS, and BD scores were higher in the AB

5 1.51 points [95% CI, 0.94-2.10]; P < .001), MMSE (mean difference, 0.56 points [95% CI, 0.32-0.80];

6 cline (ADAS_cog, P = 0.011; FAQ, P = 0.0016; MMSE, P = 0.004).

7 vs. post-procedure: 5 [3 to 7], p = 0.002), MMSE (pre-procedure: 27 [25 to 28] vs. post-procedure: 2

8 xicity were IRI arm (odds ratio [OR], 5.03), MMSE </= 27/30 (OR, 3.84), and impaired IADL (OR, 4.67);

9 interaction contributed an additional -0.16 MMSE points per year (95% CI, -0.29 to -0.03; P = .01).

10 e decline attributable to delirium was -0.37 MMSE points per year (95% CI, -0.60 to -0.13; P < .001).

11 e pathologic processes of dementia was -0.39 MMSE points per year (95% CI, -0.57 to -0.22; P < .001).

12 hologic processes of dementia declining 0.72 MMSE points per year faster than age-, sex-, and educati

13 Cognition averaged 0.8 MMSE (mini-mental state examination) points better (95%

14 nitive decline was defined as experiencing a MMSE change from baseline to the follow-up within the lo

15 and 7 patients with Alzheimer disease (AD) (MMSE <19).

16 nd performance on cognitive tests (ADAS_cog, MMSE, and FAQ) was determined with 2 different correlati

17 Combining age, MMSE score, Charlson's comorbidity index, and length of

18 In conclusion, although MMSE score and single items are altered in patients with

19 zed intensities was performed to generate an MMSE-sensitive map.

20 howed individually divergent results with an MMSE rate of change of -3.2 points per year.

21 .003), PSP (p=0.022) and CBD (p=0.0002); and MMSE in CBD (p=0.004).

22 .3 +/- 17.1 vs. 9.8 +/- 14.7; p = 0.002) and MMSE (DeltaMMSE: 1.8 +/- 3.0 vs. 0.7 +/- 1.9; p = 0.002)

23 nt change on CDR-SB (r = 0.42, P < 0.01) and MMSE (r =-0.52, P < 0.01).

24 In the ABC21, folate, vitamin B-12, and MMSE score were positively correlated and homocysteine w

25 (MMSE) score and microglial activation, and MMSE score and rCMRGlc.

26 The domain-composite and MMSE-type global cognitive function z scores both decrea

27 iation between use of psychotropic drugs and MMSE score (p = 0.004) is particularly potent in those c

28 usting for age, sex, years of education, and MMSE.

29 clinical measures (grey matter fraction and MMSE), obtained an accuracy of 88%.

30 otal score of SOFA (severity of illness) and MMSE (cognitive impairment).

31 correlation was found between VF indices and MMSE or H-Y scores.

32 he change of ipsilateral brain perfusion and MMSE (r = -0.33, p = 0.01) was also identified.

33 On the basis of age, sex, and MMSE score only, the 3-year progression risk to AD demen

34 henotypic sharing between RNFL thickness and MMSE (5%, 95% CI: 0-10%) or RT (7%, 95% CI: 1-12%).

35 he relation between level of alcohol use and MMSE score change between waves 2 and 3 of the study was

36 orrelation with any of MMSE items as well as MMSE summary score.

37 ly tested within 12 months of death (average MMSE 24.2).

38 ms experienced a significant gain in average MMSE score longitudinally over time, with no difference

39 erienced a statistically significant average MMSE score increase over time, with no difference betwee

40 Most patients with an abnormal baseline MMSE score (< 27) experienced significant increases.

41 Patients with an abnormal baseline MMSE were more likely to have an improvement in cognitiv

42 seline MMSE 20-26) and moderate AD (baseline MMSE 15-19) responded differently to tarenflurbil in the

43 evealed that patients with mild AD (baseline MMSE 20-26) and moderate AD (baseline MMSE 15-19) respon

44 Age at onset, baseline MMSE, years of education, motor exam score, sex, depress

45 of aging 5 years in relation to the baseline MMSE score in study data.

46 isk of clinical outcomes related to baseline MMSE scores, and decline in MMSE scores during follow-up

47 included in the MMSE substudy with baseline MMSE score measured, 1453 patients were assigned to sacu

48 Compared with those with baseline MMSE scores of 28 to 30, patients in the lower MMSE scor

49 The BC-MMSE association was greater only among individuals with

50 However, CRP modified the BC-MMSE relationship, with stronger associations only at hi

51 Because MMSE could be impaired in several cognitive dysfunctions

52 n, smoking, alcohol intake, and time between MMSE tests.

53 well with cognitive status as determined by MMSE when the entire cohort of controls and AD patients

54 Cognitive change, measured by MMSE, did not differ between treatment with sacubitril/v

55 yme immunoassay, and the cognitive status by MMSE.

56 ical Normative Database Initiative collected MMSE scores on 122,512 persons from 47 studies conducted

57 n GADS scores as compared to close contacts (MMSE: adjusted coefficient: -1.85; 95% confidence interv

58 slightly lower in individuals with decreased MMSE scores.

59 uce the Bayesian minimum mean squared error (MMSE) conditional error estimator and demonstrate its co

60 4) as well as on the mini-mental state exam (MMSE), digit symbol substitution (DSS) test, and a verba

61 ons of the Folstein mini-mental status exam (MMSE) and Goldberg anxiety and depression scale (GADS).

62 airment (MCI) [minimental state examination (MMSE) >/=19], 2 patients with pre-MCI (normal MMSE), and

63 (measured by mini-mental state examination (MMSE) [primary outcome] and other cognitive tests) over

64 asured by the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) and assessed by observers through the Informant Qu

65 determined by Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) and Cambridge Assessment of Mental Health for the

66 ing using the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) and Clinical Dementia Rating scale.

67 e measured as mini mental state examination (MMSE) and composite cognitive score (CCS) over a 4-year

68 red using the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) and delayed memory recall component of the of the

69 standardized Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) and memory, processing speed, language, and execut

70 ng tests, the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) and Mini-Cog, administered at hospital discharge,

71 of a baseline Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) and MRI or CSF biomarker assessment.

72 s assessed by Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) at baseline and years 1, 2, 3, and 5.

73 points on the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) at follow-up.

74 alk tests and Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) at initial, two-month, and yearly visits.

75 completed the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) at three time points in 1981, 1982, and 1993-1996.

76 completed the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) during three study waves in 1981, 1982, and 1993-1

77 completed the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) in 1991, and at that time, they or caregivers also

78 Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) is one of the most commonly used methods in the as

79 The Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) is one of the most widely used cognitive screening

80 The Mini Mental State Examination (MMSE) is recommended to test for CI.

81 sessed by the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) is reported here.

82 ed with lower Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) points at baseline (r=-0.461, p<0.001) and associa

83 i type, and a Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) rate of change of +1.8 points per year, whereas pa

84 arameters and Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) results.

85 0.009], lower Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) score (MMSE, [27 (23-29) vs 28 (27-30) points; P =

86 gender, lower mini-mental state examination (MMSE) score and higher AD assessment scale cognitive sub

87 ation between mini-mental state examination (MMSE) score and microglial activation, and MMSE score an

88 defined as a Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) score less than 18.

89 ity who had a mini-mental state examination (MMSE) score of 15-26 were randomly assigned to receive t

90 ed a baseline Mini Mental State Examination (MMSE) score of 24.

91 </= 1 in 75%, Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) score was </= 27/30 in 31%, and Instrumental Activ

92 all score and Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) score was assessed at baseline and follow-up using

93 (FPI) score, Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) score, and handgrip and handheld dynamometer stren

94 Folstein Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) scores and neurologic function scores (NFS) at bas

95 subscores and Mini Mental State Examination (MMSE) scores at baseline (analyses of variance, receiver

96 es: Change in Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) scores during the 6 years before death.

97 a42 predicted Mini Mental State Examination (MMSE) scores in healthy elderly, whereas Abeta burden an

98 and change in Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) scores in the Normative Aging Study, a cohort of e

99 s incapacity, Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) scores less than 20 increased the likelihood of in

100 ct changes in Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) scores over 24-months using standardized data.

101 and Folstein Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) scores recorded at baseline, 6, 12, 18, and 24 mon

102 ia status and Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) scores were defined in the baseline study and thre

103 esveratrol on Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) scores, macrophage M1M2 phenotype [the ratio of in

104 ness, and the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) to assess cognitive function.

105 asma GFAP and Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) was included in the study.

106 reater on the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) were enrolled.

107 nts including Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE), Alzheimer Disease Assessment Scale-Cognitive subs

108 sed using the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE), and cognitive decline was defined as experiencing

109 atteries, the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE), and the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA).

110 including the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE), Frontotemporal Lobar Degeneration-Clinical Dement

111 ssment (MNA), Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE), Geriatric Depression Scale (GDS15), and Timed Get

112 rmance by the Mini Mental State Examination (MMSE), National Adult Reading Test (NART), Raven's Progr

113 graphy, PET), Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE), Neuropsychiatric Inventory (NPI), and Everyday Co

114 ormance using Mini Mental State Examination (MMSE), PD staging using modified Hoehn and Yahr (H-Y) sc

115 scores on the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE), the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale, the Scale for

116 ubscales, the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE), the HD Activities of Daily Living (ADL) Scale, an

117 sted with the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE), the Mattis Dementia Rating Scale, and the Executi

118 (UPSIT), the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE), the Mattis Dementia Rating Scale-2 (DRS-2), and t

119 performance: Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE), the Stroop Color and Word test, and Ruff 2 & 7 te

120 by using the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE), the Trail Making Test (TMT) A and B, and the Verb

121 /= 25) on the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE), which is a proxy of poor cognition.

122 y of 7 tests: Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE), word list learning (verbal memory), digit span (a

123 individuals); Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE)-type tests were available at the end of treatment

124 ally with the mini-mental state examination (MMSE).

125 ing Scale and Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE).

126 ersion of the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE).

127 rmance on the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE).

128 n measured by Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE).

129 e severity on Mini Mental State Examination (MMSE).

130 'passed' the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE).

131 sed using the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE)].

132 erformance on mini mental state examination (MMSE, F(5,883) = 5.8, p < 0.001), and with faster reacti

133 scores on the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE; -2.4 points over 36 weeks) and the cognitive subsc

134 performance), Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE; 0 [worst] to 30 [best] points), Clinical Dementia

135 ts had annual Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE; median follow-up duration = 3.0 years) and were ge

136 p=0.011) and Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE; p=0.004) at 1 year; these differences were not pre

137 he use of the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE; score range, 0 to 30, with lower scores indicating

138 ents with the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE; score range, 0-30, with lower scores reflecting wo

139 measured by mini-mental status examination (MMSE) and negatively correlated with CSF tau levels, sug

140 pression with MiniMental Status Examination (MMSE) and neurofibrillary tangle (NFT) scores across all

141 underwent a Mini-Mental Status Examination (MMSE) for correlation with the whole-brain NAA.

142 er, race and Mini-Mental Status Examination (MMSE) result were not predictive.

143 ted with the mini-mental status examination (MMSE) score.

144 ividuals with MiniMental Status Examination (MMSE) scores lower than 10 were testable by recognition

145 Hourly Mini-Mental Status Examination (MMSE) scores showed an increase during stimulation when

146 AS_cog), the Mini-Mental Status Examination (MMSE), and the Functional Activities Questionnaire (FAQ)

147 t (defined as Mini Mental State Examination [MMSE] </=25) using data from nine cohorts of patients wi

148 10.6 y; mean Mini-Mental State Examination [MMSE] score +/- SD, 22.2 +/- 6.0) or frontotemporal loba

149 th severe AD (mini-mental state examination [MMSE] score 5-12 points), in a nursing home setting were

150 age, sex, and Mini-Mental State Examination [MMSE] score), magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) biomarker

151 and mean [SE] Mini-Mental State Examination [MMSE] score, 28 [0.3]), 61 patients with mild cognitive

152 median [IQR] Mini-Mental State Examination [MMSE] score, 29 [28 to 30]) had higher median (IQR) IES-

153 er's disease (mini-mental state examination [MMSE] scores 10-24) at 11 sites in Russia.

154 the 30-point Mini Mental State Examination [MMSE]), and adverse events.

155 ng variables (Mini-Mental State Examination [MMSE], age, education, gender, and center).

156 irrhosis underwent neurological examination, MMSE and electroencephalography (EEG).

157 t battery and Mini Mental State Examination; MMSE).

158 Sequential Mini-Mental State Examinations (MMSE) demonstrated an 80% reduction in new cognitive def

159 s in the proportion of patients experiencing MMSE score decline between the randomized study arms at

160 Geriatric factors (MMSE and IADL) are predictive of severe toxicity or unex

161 re for PACC at baseline was 0.00 (2.60); for MMSE, 29.0 (1.2); for CDR-Sum of Boxes, 0.04 (0.14); and

162 ifferences were found between PD and PSP for MMSE and ACE-R (total score and subscores for attention

163 readmission performance status, IADL, GDS15, MMSE, GUG, and MNA were associated with increased likeli

164 creased risk of FTD, associated with greater MMSE decline over time in PD subjects but not in AD or M

165 items are altered in patients with overt HE, MMSE has no value in the assessment of minimal HE.

166 iving independently had significantly higher MMSE scores, lower SANS scores, more years of education,

167 vere toxicity or unexpected hospitalization (MMSE) in a randomized prospective phase III study in mCR

168 28) and 40 at risk of cognitive impairment (MMSE 24-27).

169 f Abeta, and are associated with an improved MMSE rate of change in ApoEe3/e3 vs. ApoEe3/e4 patients.

170 -2.7 p = 0.004, MWU Z = -3.0 p = 0.005), in MMSE at one and 52 weeks (MWU Z = -2.9 p = 0.003, MWU Z

171 Examining the change in MMSE score from baseline, a decrease in MMSE score durin

172 oncentration was associated with a change in MMSE score of -0.24 (95% confidence interval: -0.44, -0.

173 ge was positively correlated with changes in MMSE and memory scores after 24 months in the drug group

174 The changes in MMSE score in response to the 3 different treatments wer

175 A decline in MMSE score during follow-up was a strong predictor of mo

176 patients experienced significant decline in MMSE score.

177 ated to baseline MMSE scores, and decline in MMSE scores during follow-up, adjusted for prognostic va

178 Analyses of a >=3-point decline in MMSE, decrease to a score <24, dementia-related adverse

179 ifying subjects with significant declines in MMSE scores, and (3) incorporating SNPs of top 10 genes

180 22(T) associated with more rapid decrease in MMSE only under the minor-allele, rs1990622(C) , dominan

181 e in MMSE score from baseline, a decrease in MMSE score during follow-up was associated with a higher

182 tients, demonstrated by greater decreases in MMSE scores (all biomarkers: -2.10 to -0.70).

183 sion, there was significant deterioration in MMSE scores for patients who were to experience progress

184 ion, clinically significant deterioration in MMSE scores was a strong predictor of a more rapid time

185 lly significant difference between groups in MMSE score.

186 No corresponding changes occurred in MMSE scores.

187 Individual MMSE score differences between waves 2 and 3 were calcul

188 ied into two groups: 40 healthy individuals (MMSE > 28) and 40 at risk of cognitive impairment (MMSE

189 Their initial MMSE score of 23.3 (SD=4.2) improved to 26.6 (SD=3.5) at

190 in cognitive function over 2 years (initial MMSE score: mean=26.3, SD=3.1; score at 2-year follow-up

191 education: 15 [12 to 17] years, median [IQR] MMSE score: 29 [28 to 30]).

192 sion of the mini-mental state examination (K-MMSE) and Alzheimer's disease assessment scale-cognitive

193 The average scores of K-MMSE in patients with MCI improved by 8% after donepezil

194 utperformed traditional noise-reduction (log-MMSE).

195 95% CI: 1.20, 2.05) times higher odds of low MMSE scores.

196 ypertension, older age, female gender, lower MMSE score and higher ADAS-cog score, had a high risk fo

197 hose who ate more calories in 1976 had lower MMSE scores in 1991 (p = 0.03), an association strengthe

198 Less-educated subjects had lower MMSE scores, especially among the very elderly.

199 SE scores of 28 to 30, patients in the lower MMSE score categories had a stepwise increase in the ris

200 ls (CIs) = 20.95 to 23.13; 124 control, mean MMSE = 22.59, 95% CI = 21.58 to 23.6; p = 0.48).

201 rences, the between-group difference in mean MMSE scores was significant 30 days after surgery (P<0.0

202 severity at diagnosis (99 intervention, mean MMSE = 22.04, 95% confidence intervals (CIs) = 20.95 to

203 EVD survivors had lower mean MMSE and higher mean GADS scores as compared to close co

204 hose without delirium, both at 1 month (mean MMSE score, 24.1 vs. 27.4; P<0.001) and at 1 year (25.2

205 postoperatively had lower preoperative mean MMSE scores than those in whom delirium did not develop

206 The mean MMSE score 6 years before death was 24.7 points.

207 The mean MMSE score of patients with MCI and pre-MCI was 25.9 at

208 D) (n = 31; age +/- SD, 63.9 +/- 7.1 y, mean MMSE score +/- SD, 23.8 +/- 6.7).

209 The median MMSE score for survivors was within the reference range

210 At baseline, the median MMSE score in patients in both the apolipoprotein E (Apo

211 pulation, including nonsurvivors, the median MMSE score was 14 in the 33 degrees C group (interquarti

212 MSE) >/=19], 2 patients with pre-MCI (normal MMSE), and 7 patients with Alzheimer disease (AD) (MMSE

213 At baseline, cognitive function was normal (MMSE score 28-30) in 1809 of 2895 patients (62.5%), bord

214 d with poor global mental status (Normalized MMSE: Model 1: gamma(0) +/- SE: -2.617 +/- 0.746, P < 0.

215 ls were associated with lower TMT-b, but not MMSE, scores.

216 items, MDF showed no correlation with any of MMSE items as well as MMSE summary score.

217 ] increase to be an independent predictor of MMSE improvement.

218 not result in significantly higher rates of MMSE score decline than RT alone through 5 years of foll

219 HE and with overt HE were seen in respect of MMSE score (p<0.02), orientation to place (p<0.003), rep

220 of the study was to investigate the value of MMSE in detection of HE in patients with cirrhosis.

221 Comparisons with one (MMSE) of the legacy tests showed however higher measurem

222 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.06-0.02) or MMSE score (0.06, 95% CI -0.002-0.12).

223 nce, 2.4 [95% CI, -1.2 to 6.0], P = .19), or MMSE score (difference, 0.6 [95% CI, -0.2 to 1.4], P = .

224 diovascular Society Angina Classification or MMSE scores.

225 ive function especially the primary outcomes MMSE and episodic memory with Bushen capsule treatment.

226 o cerebellum FDG metabolism ratios predicted MMSE (beta=0.38, p=0.001) and MoCA (beta=0.3, p=0.002) a

227 whereas Abeta burden and CSF p-tau predicted MMSE scores in AD/MCI.

228 stimulation when compared to prestimulation MMSE, largely due to improvement in recall, possibly rep

229 ated with each other (r = 0.73) and with raw MMSE point totals.

230 ementia (mini-mental state examination score MMSE=23), mean yearly loss of brain volume was 2.8% (95%

231 ere correlated with a lower cognitive score (MMSE) and lower brain volume, while in the symptomatic p

232 Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) score (MMSE, [27 (23-29) vs 28 (27-30) points; P = 0.021], leng

233 ficient [25(OH)D <20 ng/mL], and mean +/- SD MMSE score was 28.0 +/- 1.5.

234 age, 65 [1] years; 45% female; and mean [SE] MMSE score, 22 [0.7]).

235 age, 68 [1] years; 38% female; and mean [SE] MMSE score, 27 [0.3]), and 65 patients with AD (mean [SE

236 under ROC of 0.814 in predicting significant MMSE decline: our model has 100% precision at 5% recall,

237 ross only control and incipient AD subjects (MMSE > 20).

238 Test performance analysis has shown that MMSE has no value as a prediction method in determining

239 The MMSE is a relatively insensitive tool, and subtle change

240 The MMSE is useful only at extreme scores.

241 The MMSE rate of change increased in the ApoE epsilon3/epsil

242 Among the MMSE items, the pentagon copying test (PCT) requires par

243 d greater declines in verbal fluency and the MMSE (P < 0.05).

244 ven patients (39%) were impaired on both the MMSE and Mini-Cog, whereas only 20 patients (28%) had sc

245 ad cognitive impairments, as assessed by the MMSE and Mini-Cog, at hospital discharge.

246 op in cognitive function (as measured by the MMSE score) 2 days after surgery than did those without

247 al cognitive performance, as assessed by the MMSE score.

248 after focal radiotherapy as measured by the MMSE.

249 eventy critically ill patients completed the MMSE and Mini-Cog just before hospital discharge.

250 th a rate of decline slightly slower for the MMSE (0.004 SD/decade less, 95% CI [0.002, 0.006], p = 0

251 The results from the MMSE test showed a statistically robust decline in cogni

252 However, the MMSE and Mini-Cog scores did not predict long-term cogni

253 le cases of incident dementia (a fall in the MMSE score to <24 points or a drop of three points in 1

254 The adjusted difference in the MMSE score was -0.90 (95% CI: -1.6, -0.19; P for trend =

255 Among 2895 patients included in the MMSE substudy with baseline MMSE score measured, 1453 pa

256 itive endpoint was the score achieved in the MMSE.

257 n multiple cognitive measures, including the MMSE, the cognitive subscale of the Brief Psychiatric Ra

258 regression analyses showed that neither the MMSE nor the Mini-Cog predicted cognitive sequelae at 6

259 oint, 19-point, and 23-point versions of the MMSE to the original 30-point version using coarse equip

260 ive decline not apparent with the use of the MMSE.

261 ing comparable scores across versions of the MMSE.

262 w the mean of the comparison subjects on the MMSE (N=8, 44%) and the Mattis Dementia Rating Scale tot

263 tients (64%) had impaired performance on the MMSE (score < 27, mean = 24.4) and 32 (45%) on the Mini-

264 scores declined a mean of 1.20 points on the MMSE (standard deviation 1.90), with 66% having scores t

265 Males declined on the MMSE at a slightly slower rate than females (difference

266 a slightly faster decline (p = 0.021) on the MMSE for Asians (-0.20 SD/decade, 95% CI [-0.28, -0.12],

267 We examined performance on the MMSE in the first year after surgery, controlling for de

268 eper decline over time in performance on the MMSE test among nonoccupationally exposed elderly men.

269 ificant correlations with several tests, the MMSE demonstrated much stronger significant correlations

270 7.4 (standard deviation, 6.6) years took the MMSE on two occasions that were an average of 3.5 (stand

271 subsequent cognitive decline rated with the MMSE and MoCA.

272 ed cognitive impairment as measured with the MMSE and the Clinical Dementia Rating scale sum-of-boxes

273 A change of more than three MMSE points was considered clinically significant.

274 y-based scores using item-level responses to MMSE component items.

275 o had no significant effect on end-treatment MMSE-type global cognitive function (z score difference:

276 he TYM-MCI, the Test Your Memory test (TYM), MMSE and revised Addenbrooke's Cognitive Examination (AC

277 A subsample of 94 subjects had a follow-up MMSE score at >=1 year after baseline.

278 la were significantly correlated with UPSIT, MMSE, DRS-2, and CDR scores.

279 We used MMSE data from 80,559 adults aged 41-99 years from 22 st

280 , overt HE (West-Haven criteria) and various MMSE items, MDF showed no correlation with any of MMSE i

281 ization, significant predictive factors were MMSE </= 27/30 (OR, 4.56) and Geriatric Depression Scale

282 whole-brain NAA loss was detected even when MMSE scores were unchanged, the former seems to be a mor

283 GSC was associated with MMSE (beta=0.08, SE 0.03; p=0.0043), CDR-SB (-0.05, 0.02

284 line (r=-0.461, p<0.001) and associated with MMSE change at follow-up after accounting for age, sex a

285 r combinations of parameters associated with MMSE could help provide better group discrimination.

286 2.34, 95% CI 1.23-4.43) were associated with MMSE decline in physically robust.

287 were found to be positively associated with MMSE, along with the identification of key components of

288 When a comparison with MMSE scores was made, (18)F-FDG significantly correlated

289 volume and hippocampal were correlated with MMSE results.

290 betapir scores significantly correlated with MMSE scores only when both controls and AD patients were

291 oyed to analyze EEG features correlated with MMSE scores.

292 ade, (18)F-FDG significantly correlated with MMSE when both controls and AD patients were included (r

293 munoreactive neurons was not correlated with MMSE, age at death, education, apolipoprotein E allele s

294 but some evidence of a weak correlation with MMSE (r =-0.22, P = 0.09).

295 gender, but had an inverse correlation with MMSE score.

296 om 26% (95% CI, 19%-34%) in younger men with MMSE scores of 29 to 76% (95% CI, 65%-84%) in older wome

297 associated neither with each other nor with MMSE.

298 235 patients with MMSE </=25 at baseline and 135 whose first study visit o

299 Neuropsychological tests with MMSE and episodic memory as the primary outcomes and res

300 to 76% (95% CI, 65%-84%) in older women with MMSE scores of 24 (1-year risk: 6% [95% CI, 4%-9%] to 24

301 d 66 control subjects (age = 73.5+/-7.3 yrs; MMSE = 29+/-1.3) from the Australian Imaging Biomarkers