Statements in which the resource exists.
SubjectPredicateObjectContext
pubmed-article:3610485rdf:typepubmed:Citationlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:3610485lifeskim:mentionsumls-concept:C0030705lld:lifeskim
pubmed-article:3610485lifeskim:mentionsumls-concept:C1707455lld:lifeskim
pubmed-article:3610485lifeskim:mentionsumls-concept:C0681889lld:lifeskim
pubmed-article:3610485lifeskim:mentionsumls-concept:C1516691lld:lifeskim
pubmed-article:3610485pubmed:issue2lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:3610485pubmed:dateCreated1987-9-23lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:3610485pubmed:abstractTextPatients with acute, complex behavioral syndromes combined with impaired comprehension and communication are difficult diagnostic challenges. Using a structured mental status interview can significantly reduce the chance of overlooking the presence of cognitive dysfunction. The authors tested the applicability of the cognitive portion of the Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale (ADAS-COG) as a screening instrument on a psychiatric consultation service. The ADAS-COG compared favorably with the Mini-Mental State Exam (MMSE), but appeared to be less influenced by educational level. The advantages and disadvantages of using each of these tests on a psychiatric consultation service are discussed.lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:3610485pubmed:languageenglld:pubmed
pubmed-article:3610485pubmed:journalhttp://linkedlifedata.com/r...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:3610485pubmed:citationSubsetIMlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:3610485pubmed:statusMEDLINElld:pubmed
pubmed-article:3610485pubmed:issn0091-2174lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:3610485pubmed:authorpubmed-author:BurkeG LGLlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:3610485pubmed:authorpubmed-author:AndrewsS RSRlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:3610485pubmed:issnTypePrintlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:3610485pubmed:volume17lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:3610485pubmed:ownerNLMlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:3610485pubmed:authorsCompleteYlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:3610485pubmed:pagination193-200lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:3610485pubmed:dateRevised2004-11-17lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:3610485pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:3610485-...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:3610485pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:3610485-...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:3610485pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:3610485-...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:3610485pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:3610485-...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:3610485pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:3610485-...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:3610485pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:3610485-...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:3610485pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:3610485-...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:3610485pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:3610485-...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:3610485pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:3610485-...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:3610485pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:3610485-...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:3610485pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:3610485-...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:3610485pubmed:year1987lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:3610485pubmed:articleTitleComparison of two cognitive rating scales in medically ill patients.lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:3610485pubmed:publicationTypeJournal Articlelld:pubmed
http://linkedlifedata.com/r...pubmed:referesTopubmed-article:3610485lld:pubmed
http://linkedlifedata.com/r...pubmed:referesTopubmed-article:3610485lld:pubmed