Encyclopedia of Clinical Neuropsychology

Living Edition
| Editors: Jeffrey Kreutzer, John DeLuca, Bruce Caplan

Clinical Dementia Rating

  • Jing Ee Tan
  • Esther Strauss
  • Elisabeth M. S. Sherman
Living reference work entry
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-56782-2_533-2




The Clinical Dementia Rating (CDR; Hughes et al. 1982) is a semi-structured, clinician-rated interview widely used to stage the progression of dementia using information provided by the patient and an informant. A global CDR score is generated to stage the severity of dementia. It is based on ratings of the patient’s functioning in six domains commonly affected in Alzheimer’s disease (AD): memory, orientation, judgment and problem solving, community affairs, home and hobbies, and personal care. The CDR rates only impairments due to cognitive deficits rather than to physical disability. A number of scoring methods have been developed over the years. In the original protocol, a box score describing the level of impairment is generated for each domain using clinical information based solely from the patient and informant and without reference to psychometric performance. The box score ranges from 0 to 3, representing “none” to “severe” impairment. Using a scoring...


Clinical Dementia Rating Single Primary Outcome Measure Research Assistant Ratings Short Portable Mental Status Questionnaire Alternative Scoring Methods 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References and Readings

  1. Cedarbaum, J. M., Jaros, M., Hernandez, C., Coley, N., Andrieu, S., Grundman, M., & Vellas, B. (2013). Rationale for use of the Clinical Dementia Rating sum of boxes as a primary outcome measure for Alzheimer’s disease clinical trials. Alzheimer’s & Dementia, 9(1), S45–S55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Chang, Y., Bondi, M. W., McEvoy, L. K., Fennema-Notestine, C., Salmon, D. P., Galasko, D., et al. (2011). Global Clinical Dementia Rating of 0.5 in MCI masks variability related to level of function. Neurology, 76(7), 652–659.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  3. Coley, N., Andrieu, S., Jaros, M., Weiner, M., Cedarbaum, J., & Vellas, B. (2011). Suitability of the Clinical Dementia Rating-sum of boxes as a single primary endpoint for Alzheimer’s disease trials. Alzheimer’s & Dementia, 7(6), 602–610.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Cortes, F., Nourhashémi, F., Guérin, O., Cantet, C., Gillette-Guyonnet, S., Andrieu, S., et al. (2008). Prognosis of Alzheimer’s disease today: A two-year prospective study in 686 patients from the REAL-FR study. Alzheimer’s & Dementia, 4(1), 22–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Dooneief, G., Marder, K., Tang, M. X., & Stern, Y. (1996). The Clinical Dementia Rating scale: Community-based validation of ‘profound’ and ‘terminal’ stages. Neurology, 46, 1746–1749.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Gelb, D. J., & St. Laurent, R. T. (1993). Alternative calculation of the Global Clinical Dementia Rating. Alzheimer Disease and Associated Disorders, 7(4), 202–211.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Hughes, C. P., Berg, L., Danziger, W. L., Coben, L. A., & Martin, R. L. (1982). A new clinical scale for the staging of dementia. British Journal of Psychiatry, 140, 566–572.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Knopman, D. S., Weintraub, S., & Pankratz, V. S. (2011). Language and behavior domains enhance the value of the Clinical Dementia Rating scale. Alzheimer’s & Dementia, 7(3), 293–299.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Lowe, D. A., Balsis, S., Miller, T. M., Benge, J. F., & Doody, R. S. (2012). Greater precision when measuring dementia severity: Establishing item parameters for the Clinical Dementia Rating scale. Dementia and Geriatric Cognitive Disorders, 34(2), 128–134.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  10. Lynch, C., Walsh, C., Blanco, A., Moran, M., Coen, R., Walsh, J., et al. (2006). The Clinical Dementia Rating sum of box score in mild dementia. Dementia and Geriatric Cognitive Disorders, 21(1), 40–43.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Marin, D., Flynn, S., Mare, M., Lantz, M., Hsu, M., Laurans, M., et al. (2001). Reliability and validity of a chronic care facility adaptation of the Clinical Dementia Rating scale. International Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry, 16(8), 745–750.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Morris, J. C. (1993). The Clinical Dementia Rating (CDR): Current version and scoring rules. Neurology, 43(11), 2412–2414.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. O’Bryant, S. E., Lacritz, L. H., Hall, J., Waring, S. C., Chan, W., Khodr, Z. G., et al. (2010). Validation of the new interpretive guidelines for the Clinical Dementia Rating scale sum of boxes score in the national Alzheimer’s coordinating center database. Archives of Neurology, 67(6), 746–749.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  14. Oremus, M., Perrault, A., Demers, L., & Wolfson, C. (2000). A review of outcome measurement instruments in Alzheimer’s disease drug trials: Psychometric properties of global scales. Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry and Neurology, 13(4), 197–205.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Perneczky, R., Hartmann, J., Grimmer, T., Drzezga, A., & Kurz, A. (2007). Cerebral metabolic correlates of the Clinical Dementia Rating scale in mild cognitive impairment. Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry and Neurology, 20(2), 84–88.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Petersen, R. C., Thomas, R. G., Grundman, M., Bennett, D., Doody, R., Ferris, S., et al. (2005). Vitamin E and donepezil for the treatment of mild cognitive impairment. New England Journal of Medicine, 352(23), 2379–2388.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Rikkert, M. G. M. O., Tona, K. D., Janssen, L., Burns, A., Lobo, A., Robert, P., et al. (2011). Validity, reliability, and feasibility of clinical staging scales in dementia: A systematic review. American Journal of Alzheimer’s Disease and Other Dementias, 26(5), 357–365.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Russo, G., Russo, M. J., Buyatti, D., Chrem, P., Bagnati, P., Suarez, M. F., et al. (2014). Utility of the Spanish version of the FTLD-modified CDR in the diagnosis and staging in frontotemporal lobar degeneration. Journal of the Neurological Sciences, 344(1–2), 63–68.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Saito, Y., & Murayama, S. (2007). Neuropathology of mild cognitive impairment. Neuropathology, 27(6), 578–584.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Schafer, K., Tractenberg, R., Sano, M., Mackell, J., Thomas, R., Gamst, A., et al. (2004). Reliability of monitoring the Clinical Dementia Rating in multicenter clinical trials. Alzheimer Disease and Associated Disorders, 18(4), 219–222.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  21. Senanarong, V., Chen, C., & Orgogozo, J. (2006). Third Asia-Pacific regional meeting of the International Working Group on Harmonization of Dementia Drug Guidelines: Meeting report summary. Alzheimer Disease and Associated Disorders, 20(4), 311–312.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Williams, M. M., Roe, C. M., & Morris, J. C. (2009). Stability of the Clinical Dementia Rating, 1979–2007. Archives of Neurology, 66(6), 773–777.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  23. Williams, M. M., Storandt, M., Roe, C. M., & Morris, J. C. (2013). Progression of Alzheimer’s disease as measured by Clinical Dementia Rating sum of boxes scores. Alzheimer’s & Dementia, 9(1), S39–S44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jing Ee Tan
    • 1
    • 2
    • 3
  • Esther Strauss
    • 3
  • Elisabeth M. S. Sherman
    • 4
  1. 1.Division of NeurologyUniversity of British ColumbiaVancouverCanada
  2. 2.Vancouver General HospitalVancouverCanada
  3. 3.Department of PsychologyUniversity of VictoriaVictoriaCanada
  4. 4.Copeman Healthcare CentreCalgaryCanada