Neurological Sciences

, Volume 40, Issue 4, pp 691–702 | Cite as

Comparison of alternate and original forms of the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA): an Italian normative study

  • Mattia Siciliano
  • Carlo Chiorri
  • Carla Passaniti
  • Valeria Sant’Elia
  • Luigi TrojanoEmail author
  • Gabriella Santangelo
Original Article



The Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) is a screening test widely used in clinical practice and suited for detection of Mild Cognitive Impairment. Alternate forms of the MoCA were developed to avoid “learning effect” in serial assessments, and the present study aimed at investigating inter-form parallelism and at providing normative values for the Italian versions of MoCAs 2 and 3.


Three separate convenience samples were recruited: the first (n = 78) completed three alternate MoCA versions for ascertaining inter-form parallelism; the second (n = 302) and the third (n = 413) samples were administered MoCA 2 or 3 to compute normative data.


A three-step procedure complemented by confirmatory factor analysis and a mixed factorial ANOVA suggested that the three MoCA versions are not strictly parallel. Multiple linear regression analysis revealed that age and education significantly influenced MoCA 2 and 3 total scores. No significant effect of sex was found. From the derived linear equation, correction grids for MoCA 2 and 3 raw scores were built and equivalent scores computed. Inferential cutoff for adjusted scores, estimated using a non-parametric technique, were 17.49 for MoCA 2 and 18.34 for MoCA 3. Correlation analysis showed strong correlations of MoCA 2 (r = 0.69, p < .001) and MoCA 3 (r = 0.61, p < .001) adjusted total scores with MMSE adjusted scores.


The three MoCA forms are not strictly parallel. Specifically developed normative data must be adopted for using MoCA in serial cognitive assessments for clinical and research studies.


Statistical methods Norms Executive functions Aging Dementia Assessment 



The authors thank Dr. Maria Rosaria Figliola, Dr. Domenico Vivarelli, Dr. Anita Sportiello, and UNITRE for their contribution in collecting data.

Compliance with ethical standards

Informed consent was obtained from all participants included in the study. The study was carried out in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki on Ethical Principles for Medical Research.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Supplementary material

10072_2019_3700_MOESM1_ESM.pdf (583 kb)
ESM 1 (PDF 582 kb)


  1. 1.
    Nasreddine ZS, Phillips NA, Bédirian V, Charbonneau S, Whitehead V, Collin I, Cummings JL, Chertkow H (2005) The Montreal Cognitive Assessment, MoCA: a brief screening tool for mild cognitive impairment. J Am Geriatr Soc 53:695–699. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Gagnon JF, Postuma RB, Joncas S, Desjardins C, Latreille V (2010) The Montreal Cognitive Assessment: a screening tool for mild cognitive impairment in REM sleep behavior disorder. Mov Disord 25:936–940. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Videnovic A, Bernard B, Fan W, Jaglin J, Leurgans S, Shannon KM (2010) The Montreal Cognitive Assessment as a screening tool for cognitive dysfunction in Huntington's disease. Mov Disord 25:401–404. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Godefroy O, Fickl A, Roussel M, Auribault C, Bugnicourt JM, Lamy C, Canaple S, Petitnicolas G (2011) Is the Montreal Cognitive Assessment superior to the mini-mental state examination to detect poststroke cognitive impairment? A study with neuropsychological evaluation. Stroke 42:1712–1716. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    McLennan SN, Mathias JL, Brennan LC, Stewart S (2011) Validity of the Montreal cognitive assessment (MoCA) as a screening test for mild cognitive impairment (MCI) in a cardiovascular population. J Geriatr Psychiatry Neurol 24:33–38. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Santangelo G, Russo A, Trojano L, Falco F, Marcuccio L, Siciliano M, Conte F, Garramone F, Tessitore A, Tedeschi G (2016) Cognitive dysfunctions and psychological symptoms in migraine without aura: a cross-sectional study. J Headache Pain 17:76. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Skorvanek M, Goldman JG, Jahanshahi M, Marras C, Rektorova I, Schmand B, van Duijn E, Goetz CG, Weintraub D, Stebbins GT, Martinez-Martin P, members of the MDS Rating Scales Review Committee (2018) Global scales for cognitive screening in Parkinson's disease: critique and recommendations. Mov Disord 33:208–218. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Damian AM, Jacobson SA, Hentz JG, Belden CM, Shill HA, Sabbagh MN, Caviness JN, Adler CH (2011) The Montreal Cognitive Assessment and the mini-mental state examination as screening instruments for cognitive impairment: item analyses and threshold scores. Dement Geriatr Cogn Disord 31:126–131. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Wong GK, Lam SW, Wong A, Ngai K, Poon WS, Mok V (2013) Comparison of Montreal cognitive assessment and mini-mental state examination in evaluating cognitive domain deficit following aneurysmal subarachnoid haemorrhage. PLoS One 8:e59946. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Oudman E, Postma A, Van der Stigchel S, Appelhof B, Wijnia JW, Nijboer TC (2014) The Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) is superior to the Mini Mental State Examination (MMSE) in detection of Korsakoff’s syndrome. Clin Neuropsychol 28:1123–1132. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Smith T, Gildeh N, Holmes C (2007) The Montreal Cognitive Assessment: validity and utility in a memory clinic setting. Can J Psychiatr 52:329–332. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Lam B, Middleton LE, Masellis M, Stuss DT, Harry RD, Kiss A, Black SE (2013) Criterion and convergent validity of the Montreal cognitive assessment with screening and standardized neuropsychological testing. J Am Geriatr Soc 61(12):2181–2185CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Tu QY, Jin H, Ding BR, Yang X, Lei ZH, Bai S, Zhang YD, Tang XQ (2013) Reliability, validity, and optimal cutoff score of the Montreal cognitive assessment (Changsha version) in ischemic cerebrovascular disease patients of human province, China. Dement Geriatr Cogn Dis Extra 3(1):25–36CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Wong GK, Ngai K, Lam SW, Wong A, Mok V, Poon WS (2013) Validity of the Montreal Cognitive Assessment for traumatic brain injury patients with intracranial haemorrhage. Brain Inj 27(4):394–398CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Federico A, Maier A, Vianello G, Mapelli D, Trentin M, Zanette G, Picelli A, Gandolfi M, Tamburin S (2015) Screening for mild cognitive impairment in Parkinson’s disease: comparison of the Italian versions of three neuropsychological tests. Parkinsons Dis 2015:681976Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Nasreddine ZS, Patel BB (2016) Validation of Montreal Cognitive Assessment, MoCA, alternate French versions. Can J Neurol Sci 43:665–671. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Costa AS, Fimm B, Friesen P, Soundjock H, Rottschy C, Gross T, Eitner F, Reich A, Schulz JB, Nasreddine ZS, Reetz K (2012) Alternate-form reliability of the Montreal cognitive assessment screening test in a clinical setting. Dement Geriatr Cogn Disord 33:379–384. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Lebedeva E, Huang M, Koski L (2016) Comparison of alternate and original items on the Montreal Cognitive Assessment. Can Geriatr J 19:15–18. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Pirani A, Tulipani C, Neri M (2006) Montreal Cognitive Assessment, Italian version.
  20. 20.
    Conti S, Bonazzi S, Laiacona M, Masina M, Coralli MV (2015) Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA)-Italian version: regression based norms and equivalent scores. Neurol Sci 36:209–214. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Pirrotta F, Timpano F, Bonanno L, Nunnari D, Marino S, Bramanti P, Lanzafame P (2015) Italian validation of Montreal Cognitive Assessment. Eur J Psychol Assess 31:131–137. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Santangelo G, Siciliano M, Pedone R, Vitale C, Falco F, Bisogno R, Siano P, Barone P, Grossi D, Santangelo F, Trojano L (2015) Normative data for the Montreal Cognitive Assessment in an Italian population sample. Neurol Sci 36:585–591. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Bosco A, Spano G, Caffò AO, Lopez A, Grattagliano I, Saracino G, Pinto K, Hoogeveen F, Lancioni GE (2017) Italians do it worse. Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) optimal cut-off scores for people with probable Alzheimer's disease and with probable cognitive impairment. Aging Clin Exp Res 29:1113–1120. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Santangelo G, Siciliano M, Trojano L (2016) Montreal Cognitive Assessment, Italian alternate versions. for MoCA 2 for MoCA 3
  25. 25.
    Spinnler H, Tognoni G (1987) Standardizzazione e taratura italiana di test neuropsicologici. [Italian standardization and adjustment of neuropsychological tests]. Ital J Neurol Sci 6:8–20Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Appollonio I, Leone M, Isella V, Piamarta F, Consoli T, Villa ML, Forapani E, Russo A, Nichelli P (2005) The Frontal Assessment Battery (FAB): normative values in an Italian population sample. Neurol Sci 26:108–116CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Folstein MF, Folstein SE, McHugh PR (1975) Mini-mental state A practical method for grading the cognitive state of patients for the clinician. J Psychiatr Res 12:189–198. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Measso G, Cavarzeran F, Zappalà G, Lebowitz BD, Crook TH, Pirozzolo FJ, Amaducci Luigi A, Massari D, Grioletto F (1993) The mini-mental state examination: normative study of an Italian random sample. Dev Neuropsychol 2:77–85. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Magni E, Binetti G, Bianchetti A, Rozzini R, Trabucchi M (1996) Mini-mental state examination: a normative study in Italian elderly population. Eur J Neurol 3:198–202. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Raykov T, Patelis T, Marcoulides GA (2011) Examining parallelism of sets of psychometric measures using latent variable modeling. Educ Psychol Meas 71:1047–1064CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Cohen JW (1988) Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences, 2nd edn. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers, HillsdaleGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Benjamini Y, Hochberg Y (1995) Controlling the false discovery rate: a practical and powerful approach to multiple testing. J R Stat Soc Ser B Stat Methodol 57:289–300. Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Freitas S, Simões MR, Alves L, Santana I (2011) Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA): normative study for the Portuguese population. J Clin Exp Neuropsychol 33:989–996. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Rossetti HC, Lacritz LH, Cullum CM, Weiner MF (2011) Normative data for the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) in a population-based sample. Neurology 77:1272–1275. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Narazaki K, Nofuji Y, Honda T, Matsuo E, Yonemoto K, Kumagai S (2013) Normative data for the Montreal Cognitive Assessment in a Japanese community-dwelling older population. Neuroepidemiology 40:23–29. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Ardila A, Bertolucci PH, Braga LW, Castro-Caldas A, Judd T, Kosmidis MH, Matute E, Nitrini R, Ostrosky-Solis F, Rosselli M (2010) Illiteracy: the neuropsychology of cognition without reading. Arch Clin Neuropsychol 25:689–712. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Merritt P, Hirshman E, Wharton W, Stangl B, Devlin J, Lenz A (2007) Evidence for gender differences in visual selective attention. Personal Individ Differ 43:597–609. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Teleb AA, Al Awamleh AA (2012) Gender differences in cognitive abilities. Curr Res Psychol 3:33–39. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Ciesielska N, Sokołowski R, Mazur E, Podhorecka M, Polak-Szabela A, Kędziora-Kornatowska K (2016) Is the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) test better suited than the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) in mild cognitive impairment (MCI) detection among people aged over 60? Meta-analysis. Psychiatr Pol 50:1039–1052. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Muthén LK, Muthén BO (2002) How to use a Monte Carlo study to decide on sample size and determine power. Struct Equ Model 9:599–620. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Iavarone A, Ronga B, Pellegrino L, Loré E, Vitaliano S, Galeone F, Carlomagno S (2004) The Frontal Assessment Battery (FAB): normative data from an Italian sample and performances of patients with Alzheimer’s disease and frontotemporal dementia. Funct Neurol 19:191–195Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Caffarra P, Vezzadini G, Dieci F, Zonato F, Venneri A (2002) Rey-Osterrieth complex figure: normative values in an Italian population sample. Neurol Sci 22:443–447CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Pigliautile M, Chiesi F, Rossetti S, Conestabile Della Staffa M, Ricci M, Federici S, Chiloiro D, Primi C, Mecocci P (2015) Normative data for the ACE-R in an Italian population sample. Neurol Sci 36:2185–2190CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Catricalà E, Gobbi E, Battista P, Miozzo A, Polito C, Boschi V, Esposito V, Cuoco S, Barone P, Sorbi S, Cappa SF, Garrard P (2017) SAND: a screening for aphasia in NeuroDegeneration. Development and normative data. Neurol Sci 38:1469–1483CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Fondazione Società Italiana di Neurologia 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Medical, Surgical, Neurological, Metabolic and Aging Sciences - MRI Research Center SUN-FISMUniversity of Campania “Luigi Vanvitelli”NaplesItaly
  2. 2.Department of PsychologyUniversity of Campania “Luigi Vanvitelli”CasertaItaly
  3. 3.Department of Educational SciencesUniversity of GenovaGenoaItaly

Personalised recommendations