ABSTRACT
Introduction: Cognitive assessment tools measure cognitive impairment and complement biomarkers to link cognitive symptoms with pathophysiological processes underlying dementia. However, language and cultural differences in multilingual populations can influence the interpretation of cognitive assessment tools when applied in cross-cultural and multinational studies.
Areas covered: This article examines the influence of culture and language on the interpretation of the Mini-Mental State Examination, Montreal Cognitive Assessment, and Alzheimer’s Disease Assessment Scale-cognitive subscale, which are more commonly used worldwide. It discusses how this impacted multinational studies. Lastly, it presents language-neutral tools such as the Visual Cognitive Assessment Test, which do not require translation when applied in multilingual populations.
Expert commentary: Linguistic and cultural variation within tools due to translation and differences in administration introduce method bias and differential item functioning, which influence the interpretation of cognitive scores in multinational studies. The ultimate goal is to have a tool that accurately measures cognitive impairment, yet with minimal influence from linguistic, cultural, educational, and demographic differences, through concerted international efforts to harmonize the development and validation of tools. While recently developed visual-based language-neutral tools show promise in the early detection of cognitive impairment, further validation will be required for these tools to be applied internationally.
Acknowledgments
The authors thank Professor Ziad Nasreddine for his contributions to the MoCA section of this review article.
Declaration of interest
The authors have no relevant affiliations or financial involvement with any organization or entity with a financial interest in or financial conflict with the subject matter or materials discussed in the manuscript. This includes employment, consultancies, honoraria, stock ownership or options, expert testimony, grants or patents received or pending, or royalties.
Reviewer disclosures
Peer reviewers on this manuscript have no relevant financial or other relationships to disclose.