Signature Test — Abnormal Signature Test
2006A rapid handwriting observation evaluated as a marker of delirium-related dysgraphia. It is historically interesting but insensitive and should not be used as a stand-alone screen.
Historical context
Experimental handwriting sign rather than a sufficiently sensitive general delirium instrument. This profile remains public for clinical and bibliographic context, but it does not add to the headline count of independent core families.
What this tool is and how to interpret its evidence
The Abnormal Signature Test is a very brief handwriting observation evaluated in older medical inpatients with and without delirium. It rests on the finding that delirium can disturb the organisation and execution of familiar writing. Asking for a signature takes under 30 seconds and may be possible when longer verbal testing is difficult.
Adamis and colleagues studied dysgraphia in 2006. A later systematic review tabulated sensitivity of 54% and specificity of 88% for an abnormal signature. That combination makes the sign too insensitive to exclude delirium: almost half of affected patients could be missed. Handwriting can also be altered by stroke, tremor, weakness, arthritis, poor vision, literacy, unfamiliar script or chronic neurological disease.
The test should be included only as historical or experimental context. Its omission while the Delirium Writing Test remains in the core is otherwise inconsistent. The two records should cross-link, and neither should be presented as equivalent to a multidomain delirium assessment. A page may describe the single-task concept, speed, study performance and practical confounders. It does not need to reproduce example signatures or diagnostic rules. An abnormal result can add to concern, but a normal signature does not safely rule out delirium and should never delay appropriate assessment.
Evidence and practical details
- Full name
- Abnormal Signature Test
- Catalogue class
- Historical context
- Record type
- context-historical
- Family
- delirium-handwriting-tests
- Related profiles
- DWT
- Purpose
- Cognitive test for delirium, Screening / case-finding, Detailed research assessment
- Population
- Older medical inpatients
- Setting
- General / acute hospital
- Items
- 1
- Administration
- <30 sec
- Evidence
- No eligible DTA study identified
- Evidence maturity
- single-DTA
- Evidence stage
- historical-source-only
- DTA studies identified
- 0
- Reference type
- Canonical source or first evaluation
- Original/source citation
- Adamis D, Reich S, Treloar A, Macdonald AJ, Martin FC Dysgraphia in elderly delirious medical inpatients Aging Clinical and Experimental Research. 2006;18(4):334-339. PMID 17063069
Format and clearly labelled links
Rights, version and permission record
- Instrument access state
- No verified public instrument form
- Instrument host
- No verified instrument host
- Current instrument/version note
- Historical/experimental assessment reported in 2006
- Rights holder
- Not yet verified
- Licence / rights basis
- No licence verified
- Rights checked
- 2026-07-19
- Rights-holder contact
- Not yet verified
Permission scope recorded at the last check
- Clinical use: Not verified; obtain the current authorised instrument and follow its terms.
- Research use: Not verified; check with the developer or rights holder.
- Web republication: Not verified; do not reproduce the form or item wording.
- Translation/adaptation: Not verified; written permission may be required.
- EHR/software integration: Not verified; check before implementation.
- Commercial use: Not verified; check before use.
Site-text licence boundary: the CC BY 4.0 notice for original deliriumtools.com editorial text does not cover third-party instruments, item wording, forms, article text, logos, screenshots or linked material.
Page record and review status
- Page version
- 3.1.0
- Last factual/source check
- 2026-07-19
- Last rights/link check
- 2026-07-19
- Curator and responsible editor
- Professor Alasdair M J MacLullich — Curator factual and source review complete (not an independent external reviewer)
- Independent external clinical review
- Not yet completed. No independent external reviewer, consortium endorsement or institutional endorsement is claimed.
Corrections and rights-holder notices can be submitted through the contribute and corrections page.
* Where shown, sensitivity/specificity are from the cited evaluation and are not pooled estimates. “DTA studies identified” describes the current audit, not a completed systematic-review count. Citation metadata checked against PubMed or a publisher record does not imply validation, study quality, endorsement or suitability for a setting. See Methodology.