Modality matters for health disparity groups on the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA): Findings from the Einstein Aging Study (EAS)

Background The Telephone‐Montreal Cognitive Assessment (T‐MoCA) is a widely‐used, remotely administered cognitive screen. The T‐MoCA demonstrates adequate psychometric properties and may be used when standard, in‐person administration of the MoCA is not feasible (Katz et al., 2020). There is a critical need to investigate the agreement of the T‐MoCA across administration modalities (in‐person versus telehealth) among ethnically and racially diverse populations. Methods The Einstein Aging Study (EAS) includes a community‐based of racially/ethnically diverse community‐dwelling individuals, ≥ age 70 from the Bronx, NY. Participants (N = 424) were free of dementia at enrollment and completed the T‐MoCA along with in‐person neuropsychological tests including the MoCA‐22, which excludes items unsuitable for telephone administration paralleling the T‐MoCA (Table 1). Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) between T‐MoCA and MoCA‐22 were used to measure agreement. Linear mixed effects models were applied to compare mean scores and ICCs among ethnic/racial groups, with and without adjusting for age, gender, education and depressive symptoms. Results Participants were on average 78.2 years, 65.8% female, 47.6% non‐Hispanic White, 38.0% non‐Hispanic Black, and 14.4% Hispanic. There was no significant difference between mean T‐MoCA and MoCA‐22 scores and no differential associations with age, gender, education, and depressive symptoms. For both modalities, NH Black (difference ‐1.54, p<.0001) and Hispanic (difference ‐2.04, p<.0001) groups demonstrated significantly lower scores compared to non‐Hispanic Whites (Table 2). As shown in Table 2, ICCs among non‐Hispanic White, non‐Hispanic Black, and Hispanic groups were 0.64, 0.50 and 0.42, respectively, and comparisons of ICCs to non‐Hispanic White were significantly lower in non‐Hispanic Black (p = 0.0495) and borderline significant in Hispanic participants (p = 0.0552). Findings were similar after adjusting for covariates. Conclusion The agreement between telephone and in‐person modalities of the MoCA was weaker in non‐Hispanic Black and Hispanic participants (compared to non‐Hispanic White). Further investigation of factors and/or items that contribute to these lower correlations is warranted. Although the T‐MoCA and other remotely administered cognitive screens have the potential to broaden accessibility to marginalized groups, researchers must use caution when developing or selecting appropriate demographically adjusted norms and interpreting scores of diverse older adults.