João de Deus Cabral Júnior, Bruno Luciano Carneiro Alves de Oliveira, Sharon Sanz Simon, Jhule Silva Passinho, Carolina Cappi, Laiss Bertola, Candida Helena L. Alves, Vanda M. F. Simões, Gilberto Sousa Alves

Accuracy of the revised Addenbrooke Cognitive Examination (ACE-R) and Mini-Mental (MMSE) in a Quilombola community with low education attainment: results of a cross-sectional study

Introduction

Accuracy of the revised addenbrooke cognitive examination (ace-r) and mini-mental (mmse) in a quilombola community with low education attainment: results of a cross-sectional study. Examines the accuracy of ACE-R and MMSE cognitive assessments in a Quilombola community with low education attainment. A cross-sectional study on cognitive function.

Abstract

Review

This study addresses a critical gap in the literature by evaluating the accuracy of two widely used cognitive screening tools, the revised Addenbrooke Cognitive Examination (ACE-R) and the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE), within a specific and often underserved population: a Quilombola community with low educational attainment. The importance of this research cannot be overstated, as the utility and validity of standard cognitive assessments are frequently challenged in populations with diverse cultural backgrounds and limited formal education, where issues like test bias and misdiagnosis are significant concerns. By focusing on a Quilombola community, the study directly confronts the need for culturally sensitive and educationally appropriate diagnostic tools, making a vital contribution to health equity and the accurate identification of cognitive impairment in vulnerable populations. The chosen methodology, a cross-sectional design, is appropriate for evaluating the accuracy and diagnostic utility of the ACE-R and MMSE in this specific context. The study aims to provide crucial data on how well these instruments perform in differentiating between individuals with and without cognitive impairment within the target community. Given the known limitations of both tests, particularly the MMSE, in individuals with low educational backgrounds, the findings regarding the ACE-R's performance will be particularly anticipated. Understanding the sensitivity, specificity, and overall predictive value of these tools in this unique demographic will offer invaluable insights into their suitability, potential need for adaptation, or the necessity for developing new, culturally anchored assessment strategies. The implications of this research are far-reaching. The results will directly inform clinical practice and public health initiatives aimed at improving cognitive health outcomes within Quilombola communities. Depending on the findings regarding the "accuracy" of the ACE-R and MMSE, the study could advocate for the adoption of specific cut-off scores, highlight the need for cultural adaptations, or underscore the urgency for developing novel assessment tools tailored to the linguistic and cultural nuances of such communities. Ultimately, this research is poised to contribute significantly to reducing health disparities, ensuring more equitable access to accurate cognitive assessment, and facilitating timely interventions for cognitive decline in a population that has historically faced systemic barriers to appropriate healthcare.

Full Text

Comments

You need to be logged in to post a comment.