Login to MyKarger

New to MyKarger? Click here to sign up.

Login with Facebook

Forgot your password?

Authors, Editors, Reviewers

For Manuscript Submission, Check or Review Login please go to Submission Websites List.

Submission Websites List

Institutional Login
(Shibboleth or Open Athens)

For the academic login, please select your country in the dropdown list. You will be redirected to verify your credentials.

Free Access

Measuring Decision-Making Capacity in Cognitively Impaired Individuals

Karlawish J.

Author affiliations

Departments of Medicine and Medical Ethics, Institute on Aging, Leonard David Institute of Health Economics, Alzheimer’s Disease Core Center, Center for Bioethics, Center for Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine, Philadelphia, Pa., USA

Corresponding Author

Jason Karlawish, MD

University of Pennsylvania

Institute on Aging, 3615 Chestnut Street

Philadelphia, PA 19104 (USA)

Tel. +1 215 898 8997, Fax +1 215 662 7812, E-Mail Jason.karlawish@uphs.upenn.edu

Related Articles for ""

Neurosignals 2008;16:91–98

Do you have an account?

Login Information

Contact Information

By signing up for MyKarger you will automatically participate in our year-End raffle.
If you Then Do Not wish To participate, please uncheck the following box.

Yes, I wish To participate In the year-End raffle And Get the chance To win some Of our most interesting books, And other attractive prizes.

I have read the Karger Terms and Conditions and agree.


Cognitive and functional losses are only part of the spectrum of disability experienced by persons with Alzheimer’s disease and related dementias. They also experience losses in the ability to make decisions, known as decision-making capacity. Researchers have made substantial progress in developing a model of capacity assessment that rests upon the concept of the 4 decision-making abilities: understanding, appreciation, choice and reasoning. Empirical research has increased our understanding of the effects of late-life cognitive impairment on a person’s ability to make decisions. This review examines studies of the capacity to consent to treatment, research and the management of everyday functional abilities. The results illustrate the clinical phenotype of the patient who retains the capacity to consent. They also suggest that measures of capacity can improve how researchers measure the benefits of cognitive enhancements and stage dementia.

© 2008 S. Karger AG, Basel


  1. Cigolle CT, Langa KM, Kabeto MU, Tian Z, Blaum CS: Geriatric conditions and disability: the Health and Retirement Study. Ann Intern Med 2007;147:156–164.
  2. McKhann G, Drachman D, Folstein M, Katzman R, Price D, Stadlan E: Clinical diagnosis of Alzheimer’s disease. Report of the NINCDS-ADRDA work group under auspices of the Department of Health and Human Services Task Force on Alzheimer’s Disease. Neurology 1984;34:939–944.
  3. Stern Y, Liu X, Albert M, et al: Application of a growth curve approach to modeling the progression of Alzheimer’s disease. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci 1996;51:M179–M184.
  4. Morris JC: The Clinical Dementia Rating (CDR): current version and scoring rules. Neurology 1993;43:2412–2414.
  5. Galasko D, Bennett D, Sano M, et al: An inventory to assess activities of daily living for clinical trials in Alzheimer’s disease. The Alzheimer’s Disease Cooperative Study. Alzheimer Dis Assoc Disord 1997;11(suppl 2):S33–S39.
  6. Lawton MP, Brody EM: Assessment of older people: Self-maintaining and instrumental activities of daily living. Gerontologist 1969;9:179–186.
  7. Appelbaum PS, Grisso T: Assessing patients’ capacities to consent to treatment. N Engl J Med 1988;319:1635–1638.
  8. Grisso T, Appelbaum PS: Assessing patients’ capacities to consent to treatment; in Grisso T, Appelbaum (eds): Assessing Competence to Consent to Treatment: A Guide for Physicians and Other Health Professionals. New York, Oxford University Press, 1998, pp 77–100.
  9. Marson DC, Ingram KK, Cody HA, Harrell LE: Assessing the competency of patients with Alzheimer’s disease under different legal standards: a prototype instrument. Arch Neurol 1995;52:949–954.
  10. Yesavage JA, Brink TL, Rose TL, et al: Development and validation of a geriatric depression screening scale: a preliminary report. J Psychiatr Res 1983;17:37–49.
  11. Karlawish JH, Schmitt FA: Why physicians need to become more proficient in assessing their patients’ competency and how they can achieve this. J Am Geriatr Soc 2000;48:1014–1016.
  12. Grisso T, Appelbaum PS: Making judgments about patients’ competence; in Grisso T, Appelbaum PS (eds): Assessing Competence to Consent to Treatment: A Guide for Physicians and Other Health Professionals. New York, Oxford University Press, 1998, pp 127–148.
  13. Grisso T, Appelbaum PS (eds): Assessing Competence to Consent to Treatment: A Guide for Physicians and Other Health Care Professionals. New York, Oxford University Press, 1998.
  14. Streiner DL, Norman GR: Health Measurement Scales: A Practical Guide to Their Development and Use, ed 2. New York, Oxford Medical Publications, 1995.
  15. Polythress N, Nicholson R, Otto RK, et al: The MacArthur Competence Assessment Tool – Criminal Adjudication: Professional Manual. Odessa, Psychological Assessment Resources, 1999.
  16. Appelbaum PS, Bonnie RJ, Karlawish JH: The capacity to vote of persons with Alzheimer’s disease. Am J Psychiatry 2005;162:2094–2100.
  17. Karlawish JH, Casarett DJ, James BD, Xie SX, Kim SY: The ability of persons with Alzheimer disease (AD) to make a decision about taking an AD treatment. Neurology 2005;64:1514–1519.
  18. Orgogozo JM, Gilman S, Dartigues JF, et al: Subacute meningoencephalitis in a subset of patients with AD after Aβ42 immunization. Neurology 2003;61:46–54.
  19. Starkstein SE, Sabe L, Chemerinski E, Jason L, Leiguarda R: Two domains of anosognosia in Alzheimer’s disease. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 1996;61:485–490.
  20. Petersen RC, Smith GE, Waring SC, Ivnik RJ, Tangelos EG, Kokmen E: Mild cognitive impairment: clinical characterization and outcome. Arch Neurol 1999;56:303–308.
  21. Storandt M, Grant EA, Miller JP, Morris JC: Rates of progression in mild cognitive impairment and early Alzheimer’s disease. Neurology 2002;59:1034–1041.
  22. Folstein MF, Folstein SE, McHugh PR: ‘Mini-mental state’: a practical method for grading the cognitive state of patients for the clinician. J Psychiatr Res 1975;12:189–198.
  23. Grisso T, Appelbaum PS: The MacArthur Competence Assessment Tool – Treatment. Sarasota, Professional Resources Press, 1998.
  24. Karlawish JHT, Klocinski J, Merz JF, Clark CM, Asch D: Caregivers’ preferences for the treatment of patients with Alzheimer’s disease. Neurology 2000;55:1008–10014.
  25. Kim SY, Caine ED, Currier GW, Leibovici A, Ryan JM: Assessing the competence of persons with Alzheimer’s disease in providing informed consent for participation in research. Am J Psychiatry 2001;158:712–717.
  26. Karlawish JHT, Casarett DJ, James BD: Alzheimer’s disease patients’ and caregivers’ capacity, competency and reasons to enroll in an early phase Alzheimer’s disease clinical trial. J Am Geriatr Soc 2002;50:2019–2024.
  27. Appelbaum PS, Grisso T: The MacArthur Competence Assessment Tool – Clinical Research. Sarasota, Professional Resources Press, 2000.
  28. Department of Health and Human Services: Common rule, 45 CFR 46. Federal policy for the protection of human subjects: notices and rules. Federal Register 1991;56:28003–28032.
    External Resources
  29. Cutler NR, Sramek JJ: Guidelines for conducting bridging studies in Alzheimer disease. Alzheimer Dis Assoc Disord 1998;12:88–92.
  30. Lai JM, Karlawish J: Assessing the capacity to make everyday decisions: a guide for clinicians and an agenda for future research. Am J Geriatr Psychiatry 2007;15:101–111.
  31. Lai JM, Cooney LM, Gill TM, Bradley EH, Hawkins KA, Karlawish JH: Evaluating the ability of older persons with cognitive deficits to solve problems in performing their activities of daily living. J Am Geriatr Soc 2007;55:D55.
  32. Marson DC, Earnst KS, Jamil F, Bartolucci A, Harrell LE: Consistency of physicians’ legal standard and personal judgments of competency in patients with Alzheimer’s disease. J Am Geriatr Soc 2000;48:911–918.

Article / Publication Details

First-Page Preview
Abstract of Paper

Published online: December 05, 2007
Issue release date: December 2007

Number of Print Pages: 8
Number of Figures: 0
Number of Tables: 0

ISSN: 1424-862X (Print)
eISSN: 1424-8638 (Online)

For additional information: https://www.karger.com/NSG

Copyright / Drug Dosage / Disclaimer

Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.