Objectives: We aimed to evaluate and compare the diagnostic capacity of five cognitive screening tests for the diagnosis of mild cognitive impairment (MCI) in patients consulting by memory loss. Methods: A cross-sectional study involving 140 participants with a mean age of 74.42 ± 7.60 years, 87 (62.14%) women. Patients were classified as MCI or cognitively unimpaired according to a comprehensive neuropsychological battery. The diagnostic properties of the following screening tests were compared: Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE), Addenbrooke’s Cognitive Examination III (ACE-III) and Mini-Addenbrooke (M-ACE), Memory Impairment Screen (MIS), Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA), and Rowland Universal Dementia Assessment Scale (RUDAS). Results: The area under the curve (AUC) was 0.861 for the ACE-III, 0.867 for M-ACE, 0.791 for MoCA, 0.795 for MMSE, 0.731 for RUDAS, and 0.672 for MIS. For the memory components, the AUC was 0.869 for ACE-III, 0.717 for MMSE, 0.755 for MoCA, and 0.720 for RUDAS. Cronbach’s alpha was 0.827 for ACE-III, 0.505 for MMSE, 0.896 for MoCA, and 0.721 for RUDAS. Correlations with Free and Cued Selective Reminding Test were moderate with M-ACE, ACE-III, and MoCA, and moderate for the other tests. The M-ACE showed the best balance between diagnostic capacity and time of administration. Conclusions: ACE-III and its brief version M-ACE showed better diagnostic properties for the diagnosis of MCI than the other screening tests. MoCA and MMSE showed adequate properties, while the diagnostic capacity of MIS and RUDAS was limited.

Background/Objectives: Fatigue is a prevalent and debilitating symptom in Post-COVID Condition (PCC), fibromyalgia, and multiple sclerosis (MS). Although these conditions share clinical similarities, the underlying mechanisms of fatigue across these conditions may differ and remain poorly understood. This study aimed to compare the intensity and characteristics of fatigue in these three conditions to identify shared and distinct features. Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional study involving 429 participants: 219 with PCC, 112 with fibromyalgia, and 98 with MS. Participants completed a questionnaire specifically developed for the study via the Google Forms platform. This questionnaire was developed by a group of professionals in the hospital specializing in fatigue related to these three conditions, in collaboration with expert patients. The questionnaire was reported following the Checklist for Reporting Results of Internet E-Surveys (CHERRIES) recommendations. Results: Fatigue intensity was significantly higher in PCC and fibromyalgia compared to MS. Some differences in fatigue characteristics were observed: MS patients reported more fatigue in response to heat and a greater impact of mood on fatigue. Furthermore, delayed fatigue and reduced benefits from rest were more pronounced in both PCC and fibromyalgia. No significant differences were found regarding cognitive fatigue or difficulties in predicting the ability to perform activities. Conclusions: These results underscore some clinical characteristics in the intensity and quality of fatigue across PCC, fibromyalgia, and MS. These findings could suggest different mechanisms in the pathophysiology of the fatigue. Our study underscores the need for tailored diagnostic tools and interventions in managing fatigue in these three conditions.