Table 1.

Studies comparing CDT scales in screening for dementia.

Study	Scales	Population	Conclusion
Storey et al. (2001)27	Shulman et al. (1993) Mendez et al. (1992) Sunderland et al. (1989) Wolf-Klein et al. (1989) Watson et al. (1993)	Dementia (n=72) No dementia (n=55)	Good reliability, but with lower accuracy than previously reported for the scales.
Richardson and Glass (2002)31	Shulman et al. (1993) Mendez et al. (1992) Sunderland et al. (1989) Wolf-Klein et al. (1989) practical scale developed by authors	AD, VD, mixed dementia (n=63)	Good correlation between the MMSE and CDT. The Shulman and practical scales performed best.
Schramm et al.(2002)28	Sunderland et al. (1989) Manos e Wu (1994) Wolf-Klein et al. (1989) Shulman et al. (1989) Watson et al. (1993)	Dementia (n=79) Controls (n=44)	Good correlation between CDT, MMSE and SKT.  Association between CDT and MMSE or SKT improved screening.
Seigerschmidt et al.(2002)34	Manos e Wu (1994) Wolf-Klein et al. (1989) Shulman et al. (1989) Watson et al. (1993)	Community elderly (health and cognitive impaired) (n=253)	Poor correlation between CDT, MMSE, verbal fluency and SKT.  Poor detection for dementia with CDT.
Scalan et al. (2002)19	Shulman et al. (1986) Mendez et al. (1992) Sunderland et al. (1989) Wolf-Klein et al. (1989) Manos e Wu (1994) Lam et al. (1998) CERAD system	AD (n=80)	Naive raters were almost as good as trained raters. Results from complex scales like Mendez were similar to simpler scales such as CERAD.
Powlishta et al. (2002)38	Rouleau et al. (1992) Manos e Wu (1994) Mendez et al. (1992) AD Cooperative Study (1999) Pfizer Inc. (1997) Sunderland et al. (1989)	AD (n=60) Controls (n=15)	Low sensitivity for very mild AD. All scales were similar in the detection of AD.
Connor et al. (2005)36	Wolf-Klein et al. (1989) Rouleau et al. (1992) Watson et al. (1993)	AD (n=50) Controls (n=50)	Good reliability between the three scales only for moderate and severe AD.

AD, Alzheimer's disease; CDT, Clock Drawing Test; MMSE, Mini-Mental State Examination.