Original Article| Volume 60, ISSUE 3, P268-279, March 2007

Mini-Mental Status Examination: Mixed Rasch model item analysis derived two different cognitive dimensions of the MMSE



      This study published in two companion papers assesses properties of the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) with the purpose of improving the efficiencies of the methods of screening for cognitive impairment and dementia.

      Study Design and Setting

      An item analysis by conventional and mixed Rasch models was used to explore empirically derived cognitive dimensions of the MMSE, to assess item bias, and to construct diagnostic cut-points. The scores of 1,189 elderly residents were analyzed.


      Two dimensions of cognitive function, which are statistically and conceptually different from those obtained in previous studies, were derived. The corresponding sum scales were (1) age-correlated MMSE scale (A-MMSE scale: orientation to time, attention/calculation, naming, repetition, and three-stage command) and (2) non–age-correlated MMSE scale (B-MMSE scale: orientation to place, registration, recall, reading, and copying). The “writing” item was not included due to differential effects of age and sex. The analysis also showed that the study sample consisted of two cognitively different groups of elderly.


      The findings indicate that a two-scale solution is a stable and statistically supported framework for interpreting data obtained by means of the MMSE. Supplementary analyses are presented in the companion paper to explore the performance of this item response theory calibration as a screening test for dementia.


      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'


      Subscribe to Journal of Clinical Epidemiology
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect


        • Tombaugh T.N.
        • McIntyre N.J.
        The mini-mental state examination: a comprehensive review.
        J Am Geriatr Soc. 1992; 40: 922-935
        • Folstein M.F.
        • Folstein S.E.
        • McHugh P.R.
        “Mini-mental state”. A practical method for grading the cognitive state of patients for the clinician.
        J Psychiatr Res. 1975; 12: 189-198
        • Tangalos E.G.
        • Smith G.E.
        • Ivnik R.J.
        • Petersen R.C.
        • Kokmen E.
        • Kurland L.T.
        • et al.
        The Mini-Mental State Examination in general medical practice: clinical utility and acceptance.
        Mayo Clin Proc. 1996; 71: 829-837
        • Wind A.W.
        • Schellevis F.G.
        • Van Staveren G.
        • Scholten R.P.
        • Jonker C.
        • Van Eijk J.T.
        Limitations of the Mini-Mental State Examination in diagnosing dementia in general practice.
        Int J Geriatr Psychiatry. 1997; 12: 101-108
        • White N.
        • Scott A.
        • Woods R.T.
        • Wenger G.C.
        • Keady J.D.
        • Devakumar M.
        The limited utility of the Mini-Mental State Examination in screening people over the age of 75 years for dementia in primary care.
        Br J Gen Pract. 2002; 52: 1002-1003
        • Heun R.
        • Papassotiropoulos A.
        • Jennssen F.
        The validity of psychometric instruments for detection of dementia in the elderly general population.
        Int J Geriatr Psychiatry. 1998; 13: 368-380
        • Aevarsson O.
        • Skoog I.
        A longitudinal population study of the mini-mental state examination in the very old: relation to dementia and education.
        Dement Geriatr Cogn Disord. 2000; 11: 166-175
        • Maki N.
        • Ikeda M.
        • Hokoishi K.
        • Nebu A.
        • Komori K.
        • Hirono N.
        • et al.
        The validity of the MMSE and SMQ as screening tests for dementia in the elderly general population—a study of one rural community in Japan.
        Dement Geriatr Cogn Disord. 2000; 11: 193-196
        • Shyu Y.I.
        • Yip P.K.
        Factor structure and explanatory variables of the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) for elderly persons in Taiwan.
        J Formos Med Assoc. 2001; 100: 676-683
        • Agrell B.
        • Dehlin O.
        Mini mental state examination in geriatric stroke patients. Validity, differences between subgroups of patients, and relationships to somatic and mental variables.
        Aging (Milano). 2000; 12: 439-444
        • Fillenbaum G.G.
        • Heyman A.
        • Wilkinson W.E.
        • Haynes C.S.
        Comparison of two screening tests in Alzheimer's disease. The correlation and reliability of the Mini-Mental State Examination and the modified Blessed test.
        Arch Neurol. 1987; 44: 924-927
        • Abraham I.L.
        • Manning C.A.
        • Snustad D.G.
        • Brashear H.R.
        • Newman M.C.
        • Wofford A.B.
        Cognitive screening of nursing home residents: factor structures of the Mini-Mental State Examination.
        J Am Geriatr Soc. 1994; 42: 750-756
        • Braekhus A.
        • Laake K.
        • Engedal K.
        The Mini-Mental State Examination: identifying the most efficient variables for detecting cognitive impairment in the elderly.
        J Am Geriatr Soc. 1992; 40: 1139-1145
        • Zillmer E.A.
        • Fowler P.C.
        • Gutnick H.N.
        • Becker E.
        Comparison of two cognitive bedside screening instruments in nursing home residents: a factor analytic study.
        J Gerontol. 1990; 45: 69-74
        • Hill R.D.
        • Backman L.
        The relationship between the mini-mental state examination and cognitive functioning in normal elderly adults: a componential analysis.
        Age Ageing. 1995; 24: 440-446
        • Jones R.N.
        • Gallo J.J.
        Dimensions of the Mini-Mental State Examination among community dwelling older adults.
        Psychol Med. 2000; 30: 605-618
        • Banos J.H.
        • Franklin L.M.
        Factor structure of the Mini-Mental State Examination in adult psychiatric inpatients.
        Psychol Assess. 2002; 14: 397-400
        • Teresi J.A.
        • Golden R.R.
        • Cross P.
        • Gurland B.
        • Kleinman M.
        • Wilder D.
        Item bias in cognitive screening measures: comparisons of elderly white, Afro-American, Hispanic and high and low education subgroups.
        J Clin Epidemiol. 1995; 48: 473-483
        • Schultz-Larsen K.
        • Haaning M.
        • Hanning S.
        • Buss D.
        Hjemmeboende ældre med demens.
        Center for Elder Research, Copenhagen1995
      1. Lomholt RK. Neuropsykologisk forløbsundersøgelse af hjemmeboende 75-83-årige. PhD Thesis. Institute of Psychology, University of Copenhagen, Center for Elder Research, Copenhagen Hospital Corporation; 2000.

        • Rosenbaum P.
        Criterion-related construct validity.
        Psychometrika. 1989; 54: 625-634
        • Andric D.
        Rasch models for measurement.
        Sage Publications, Beverly Hills and London1988
        • Fischer G.H.
        • Molenaar I.W.
        Rasch models: foundations, recent developments and applications.
        Springer-Verlag, New York1995
        • Avlund K.
        • Kreiner S.
        • Schultz-Larsen K.
        Construct validation and the Rasch model: functional ability of healthy elderly people.
        Scand J Soc Med. 1993; 21: 233-246
        • Kreiner S.
        Validation of index scales for analysis of survey data: the symptom index.
        in: Dean K. Population health research: linking theory and methods. Sage Publications, London1993: 116-144
        • Hays R.D.
        • Morales L.S.
        • Reise S.P.
        Item response theory and health outcomes measurement in the 21st century.
        Med Care. 2000; 38: II28-II42
        • Tennant A.
        • Penta M.
        • Tesio L.
        • Grimby G.
        • Thonnard J.L.
        • Slade A.
        • et al.
        Assessing and adjusting for cross-cultural validity of impairment and activity limitation scales through differential item functioning within the framework of the Rasch model: the PRO-ESOR project.
        Med Care. 2004; 42: I37-I48
        • Rost J.
        Rasch models in latent classes: an integration of two approaches to item analysis.
        Appl Psychol Meas. 1990; 14: 271-282
        • von Davier M.
        • Rost J.
        Polytomous mixed Rasch models.
        in: Fischer G. Molenaar I. Rasch models: foundations, recent developments and applications. Springer-Verlag, New York1995: 307-323
        • Rost J.
        • von Davier M.
        Mixture distribution Rasch models.
        in: Fischer G. Molenaar I. Rasch models: foundations, recent developments and applications. Springer-Verlag, New York1995: 257-268
        • Kreiner S.
        • Simonsen E.
        • Mogensen J.
        Validation of a personality inventory scale: the MCMI P Scale (Paranoia).
        J Personal Disord. 1990; 4: 303-311
      2. Kreiner S, Hansen M, Hansen CB. On local homogeneity and stochastically ordered mixture Rasch models. Research report 03/7. 2003. Department of Biostatistics, University of Copenhagen. Appl Psychol Meas. In press.

        • Smith E.V.
        • Smith R.M.
        Introduction to Rasch measurement.
        JAM Press, Maple Grove2004
        • Andersen E.B.
        Goodness of fit test for Rasch model.
        Psychometrika. 1973; 38: 123-140
        • Molenaar I.W.
        Some improved diagnostics for failure of the Rasch model.
        Psychometrika. 1983; 48: 49-72
      3. Holland P.W. Wainer H. Differential item functioning. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale1993
        • Kreiner S.
        • Christensen K.B.
        Analysis of local dependence and multidimensionality in graphical loglinear Rasch models.
        Commun Statistics Theory Methods. 2004; 33: 1239-1276
        • Kelderman H.
        Loglinear Rasch model tests.
        Psychometrika. 1984; 49: 223-245
        • Christensen K.B.
        • Bjorner J.B.
        • Kreiner S.
        • Petersen J.H.
        Testing unidimensionality in polytomous Rasch models.
        Psychometrika. 2002; 67: 563-574
        • Stout W.
        • Habing B.
        • Douglas J.
        • Kim H.R.
        • Roussos L.
        • Zhang J.M.
        Conditional covariance-based nonparametric multidimensionality assessment.
        Appl Psychol Meas. 1996; 20: 331-354
        • Takane Y.
        • Deleeuw J.
        On the relationship between item response theory and factor-analysis of discretized variables.
        Psychometrika. 1987; 52: 393-408
        • Baker F.B.
        Item response theory. Parameter estimation techniques.
        Marcel Dekker, New York1992
        • Muthen B.O.
        • Kao C.F.
        • Burstein L.
        Instructionally sensitive psychometrics—application of a new IRT-based detection technique to mathematics achievement-test items.
        J Educ Meas. 1991; 28: 1-22
        • Satorra A.
        • Bentler P.M.
        Scaling corrections for chi-square statistics in covariance structure analysis.
        ASA Proc Business Econ Section. 1988; : 549-554
        • Kreiner S.
        Determination of cut-points for diagnostic tests using stochastically ordered mixed Rasch models.
        in: von Davier M. Carstensen C.H. Multivariate and mixture distribution Rasch models. Springer-Verlag, 2006 (In press)
      4. Kreiner S. Introduction to DIGRAM. Research report 03/10. 2003. Department of Biostatistics, University of Copenhagen.

      5. Kreiner S, Nielsen T. Item analysis. Introduction to item analysis in DIGRAM. Research report 03/7. 2003. Department of Biostatistics, University of Copenhagen.

        • von Davier M.
        WINMIRA: a Windows program for analysis with the Rasch model, with the latent class model, and with the mixed Rasch model.
        Institute for Science Education, Kiel1994
        • Muthén L.B.
        • Muthén B.O.
        Mplus user's guide.
        Muthén and Muthén, Los Angeles1998
        • Schultz-Larsen K.
        • Lomholt R.K.
        • Kreiner S.
        Mini-Mental Status Examination: a short form of MMSE was as accurate in predicting dementia.
        J Clin Epidemiol. 2006; 60: 260-267
        • Brayne C.
        • Calloway P.
        The association of education and socioeconomic status with the Mini Mental State Examination and the clinical diagnosis of dementia in elderly people.
        Age Ageing. 1990; 19: 91-96
        • O'Connor D.W.
        • Pollitt P.A.
        • Treasure F.P.
        The influence of education and social class on the diagnosis of dementia in a community population.
        Psychol Med. 1991; 21: 219-224
        • Crum R.M.
        • Anthony J.C.
        • Bassett S.S.
        • Folstein M.F.
        Population-based norms for the Mini-Mental State Examination by age and educational level.
        JAMA. 1993; 269: 2386-2391
        • Grigoletto F.
        • Zappala G.
        • Anderson D.W.
        • Lebowitz B.D.
        Norms for the Mini-Mental State Examination in a healthy population.
        Neurology. 1999; 53: 315-320
        • Dufouil C.
        • Clayton D.
        • Brayne C.
        • Chi L.Y.
        • Dening T.R.
        • Paykel E.S.
        • et al.
        Population norms for the MMSE in the very old: estimates based on longitudinal data. Mini-Mental State Examination.
        Neurology. 2000; 55: 1609-1613