Abstract:Various tools exist for initial assessment of possible dementia with no consensus on the optimal assessment method. Instruments that use collateral sources to assess change in cognitive function over time may have particular utility. The most commonly used informant dementia assessment is the Informant Questionnaire on Cognitive Decline in the Elderly (IQCODE). A synthesis of the available data regarding IQCODE accuracy will help inform cognitive assessment strategies for clinical practice, research and policy. Our primary obective was to determine the accuracy of the informant‐based questionnaire IQCODE for detection of dementia within community dwelling populations. Our secondary objective was to describe the effect of heterogeneity on the summary estimates. We were particularly interested in the traditional 26‐item scale versus the 16‐item short form; and language of administration. We explored the effect of varying the threshold IQCODE score used to define 'test positivity'. We searched the following sources on 28 January 2013: ALOIS (Cochrane Dementia and Cognitive Improvement Group), MEDLINE (OvidSP), EMBASE (OvidSP), PsycINFO (OvidSP), BIOSIS Previews (ISI Web of Knowledge), Web of Science with Conference Proceedings (ISI Web of Knowledge), LILACS (BIREME). We also searched sources relevant or specific to diagnostic test accuracy: MEDION (Universities of Maastrict and Leuven); DARE (York University); ARIF (Birmingham University). We used sensitive search terms based on MeSH terms and other controlled vocabulary. We selected those studies performed in community settings that used (not necessarily exclusively) the IQCODE to assess for presence of dementia and, where dementia diagnosis was confirmed with clinical assessment. Our intention with limiting the search to a 'community' setting was to include those studies closest to population level assessment. Within our predefined community inclusion criteria, there were relevant papers that fulfilled our definition of community dwelling but represented a selected population, for example stroke survivors. We included these studies but performed sensitivity analyses to assess the effects of these less representative populations on the summary results. We screened all titles generated by the electronic database searches and abstracts of all potentially relevant studies were reviewed. Full papers were assessed for eligibility and data extracted by two independent assessors. For quality assessment (risk of bias and applicability) we used the QUADAS 2 tool. We included test accuracy data on the IQCODE used at predefined diagnostic thresholds. Where data allowed, we performed meta‐analyses to calculate summary values of sensitivity and specificity with corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We pre‐specified analyses to describe the effect of IQCODE format (traditional or short form) and language of administration for the IQCODE. From 16,144 citations, 71 papers described IQCODE test accuracy. We included 10 papers (11 independent datasets) representing data from 2644 individuals (n = 379 (14%) with dementia). Using IQCODE cut‐offs commonly employed in clinical practice (3.3, 3.4, 3.5, 3.6) the sensitivity and specificity of IQCODE for diagnosis of dementia across the studies were generally above 75%. Taking an IQCODE threshold of 3.3 (or closest available) the sensitivity was 0.80 (95% CI 0.75 to 0.85); specificity was 0.84 (95% CI 0.78 to 0.90); positive likelihood ratio was 5.2 (95% CI 3.7 to 7.5) and the negative likelihood ratio was 0.23 (95% CI 0.19 to 0.29). Comparative analysis suggested no significant difference in the test accuracy of the 16 and 26‐item IQCODE tests and no significant difference in test accuracy by language of administration. There was little difference in sensitivity across our predefined diagnostic cut‐points. There was substantial heterogeneity in the included studies. Sensitivity analyses removing potentially unrepresentative populations in these studies made little difference to the pooled data estimates. The majority of included papers had potential for bias, particularly around participant selection and sampling. The quality of reporting was suboptimal particularly regarding timing of assessments and descriptors of reproducibility and inter‐observer variability. Published data suggest that if using the IQCODE for community dwelling older adults, the 16 item IQCODE may be preferable to the traditional scale due to lesser test burden and no obvious difference in accuracy. Although IQCODE test accuracy is in a range that many would consider 'reasonable', in the context of community or population settings the use of the IQCODE alone would result in substantial misdiagnosis and false reassurance. Across the included studies there were issues with heterogeneity, several potential biases and suboptimal reporting quality. Numbers of people with dementia and other cognit -Abstract Truncated-

Validation of the Kimberley Cognitive Assessment (KICA‐Cog) for Torres Strait Islander Peoples

The development of a cognitive screening protocol for Aboriginal and/or Torres Strait Islander peoples: the Guddi Way screen

The Discriminant Validity of Single-Question Assessments of Subjective Cognitive Complaints in an Asian Older Adult Population.

Discriminant Validity and Time‐effectiveness of A Stepwise Dementia Case‐finding Approach in an Asian Elderly Community

Primary care biomarkers and dementia in people of the Torres Strait, Australia: extended data analysis

Screening for cognitive symptoms in dialysis patients with an extended version of Kidney Disease Quality of Life Cognitive Function subscale (KDQOL-CF): a validation study

The Usefulness of the Regression-Based Normed SKT Short Cognitive Performance Test in Detecting Cognitive Impairment in a Community Sample

Cross-cultural difference and validation of the Chinese version of Montreal Cognitive Assessment in older adults residing in Eastern China: preliminary findings.

Culturally adapted cognitive assessment tool for Indigenous communities in Brazil: Content, construct, and criterion validity

Modified Brief Cognitive Screening Battery - Indonesian Version: cross-cultural adaptation and normative data based on demographic factors in North Sumatra, Indonesia

Use of the Dementia Assessment Sheet for Community‐based Integrated Care System 21 Items among Chinese Community‐dwelling Older Adults

Multicenter Validation of the English Version of the Dépistage Cognitif de Québec: a Cognitive Screening Tool for Atypical Dementias

Content development of the VISION-Cog: a novel tool to assess cognitive impairment in visually impaired older adults in Singapore

Informant Questionnaire on Cognitive Decline in the Elderly (IQCODE) for the detection of dementia within community dwelling populations.

Strength together: examining risk and protective factors associated with dementia and cognitive impairment in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples through harmonisation of landmark studies

A Mobile Interactive Cognitive Self-Assessment Scale for Screening Alzheimer’s Disease

Validating cognitive screening in young people with first‐episode psychosis: The CogScreen protocol

Community-based dementia risk management and prevention program for Aboriginal Australians (DAMPAA): a randomised controlled trial study protocol

Non-literacy biased, culturally fair cognitive detection tool in primary care patients with cognitive concerns: a randomized controlled trial

A Comparative Study of Three Dementia Screening Instruments (CSI-D, CMMSE, and ECAQ) in a Multi-Ethnic Asian Population

Development of the Brazilian version of the Mini-Addenbrooke Cognitive Examination (M-ACE BR) to screen for cognitive impairment in older adults