Development of a self-administered web-based test for longitudinal cognitive assessment.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Ruano L
PROVIDER: S-EPMC4705487 | biostudies-literature | 2016 Jan
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Development of a self-administered web-based test for longitudinal cognitive assessment.
Ruano Luis L Sousa Andreia A Severo Milton M Alves Ivânia I Colunas Márcio M Barreto Rui R Mateus Cátia C Moreira Sandra S Conde Eduardo E Bento Virgílio V Lunet Nuno N Pais Joana J Tedim Cruz Vítor V
Scientific reports 20160108
Sequential testing with brief cognitive tools has been recommended to improve cognitive screening and monitoring, however the few available tools still depend on an external evaluator and periodic visits. We developed a self-administered computerized test intended for longitudinal cognitive testing (Brain on Track). The test can be performed from a home computer and is composed of several subtests, expected to evaluate different cognitive domains, all including random elements to minimize learni ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:Computerized cognitive tests have the potential to cost-effectively detect and monitor cognitive impairments and thereby facilitate treatment for these conditions. However, relatively few of these tests have been validated in a variety of populations. Brain on Track, a self-administered web-based test, has previously been shown to have a good ability to differentiate between healthy individuals and patients with cognitive impairment in Portuguese populations. The objective of this study was to validate the differential ability and evaluate the usability of Brain on Track in a Swedish memory clinic setting. Brain on Track was administered to 30 patients with mild cognitive impairment/mild dementia and 30 healthy controls, all scheduled to perform the test from home after one week and after three months. To evaluate the usability, the patient group was interviewed after completion of the testing phase. Patients scored lower than healthy controls at both the first (median score 42.4 vs 54.1, p<0.001) and the second test (median score 42.3 vs 55.0, p<0.001). The test-retest intra-class correlation was 0.87. A multiple logistic regression model accounting for effects of age, gender and education rendered an ability of Brain on Track to differentiate between the groups with an area under the receiver operation characteristics curve of 0.90 for the first and 0.88 for the second test. In the subjective evaluation, nine patients left positive comments, nine were negative whereas five left mixed comments regarding the test experience. Sixty percent of patients had received help from relatives to log on to the platform. In conclusion, Brain on Track performed well in differentiating healthy controls from patients with cognitive impairment and showed a high test-retest reliability, on par with results from previous studies. However, the substantial proportion of patients needing help to log in could to some extent limit an independent use of the platform.
| S-EPMC10833583 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionAs the population ages, the prevalence of cognitive impairment is expanding. Given the recent pandemic, there is a need for remote testing modalities to assess cognitive deficits in individuals with neurological disorders. Self-administered, remote, tablet-based cognitive assessments would be clinically valuable if they can detect and classify cognitive deficits as effectively as traditional in-person neuropsychological testing.MethodsWe tested whether the Miro application, a tablet-based neurocognitive platform, measured the same cognitive domains as traditional pencil-and-paper neuropsychological tests. Seventy-nine patients were recruited and then randomized to either undergo pencil-and-paper or tablet testing first. Twenty-nine age-matched healthy controls completed the tablet-based assessments. We identified Pearson correlations between Miro tablet-based modules and corresponding neuropsychological tests in patients and compared scores of patients with neurological disorders with those of healthy controls using t tests.ResultsStatistically significant Pearson correlations between the neuropsychological tests and their tablet equivalents were found for all domains with moderate (r > 0.3) or strong (r > 0.7) correlations in 16 of 17 tests (p < 0.05). All tablet-based subtests differentiated healthy controls from neurologically impaired patients by t tests except for the spatial span forward and finger tapping modules. Participants reported enjoyment of the tablet-based testing, denied that it provoked anxiety, and noted no preference between modalities.ConclusionsThis tablet-based application was found to be widely acceptable to participants. This study supports the validity of these tablet-based assessments in the differentiation of healthy controls from patients with neurocognitive deficits in a variety of cognitive domains and across multiple neurological disease etiologies.
| S-EPMC10247386 | biostudies-literature
Project description:We present a dataset of approximately 5.5 million subtest scores from over 750,000 adults who completed the NeuroCognitive Performance Test (NCPT; Lumos Labs, Inc.), a validated, self-administered cognitive test accessed via web browser. The dataset includes assessment scores from eight test batteries consisting of 5-11 subtests that collectively span several cognitive domains including working memory, visual attention, and abstract reasoning. In addition to the raw scores and normative data from each subtest, the dataset includes basic demographic information from each participant (age, gender, and educational background). The scale and diversity of the dataset provides an unprecedented opportunity for researchers to investigate population-level variability in cognitive abilities and their relation to demographic factors. To facilitate reuse of this dataset by other researchers, we provide a Python module that supports several common preprocessing steps.
| S-EPMC9731954 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundCognitive screening is limited by clinician time and variability in administration and scoring. We therefore developed Self-Administered Tasks Uncovering Risk of Neurodegeneration (SATURN), a free, public-domain, self-administered, and automatically scored cognitive screening test, and validated it on inexpensive (<$100) computer tablets.MethodsSATURN is a 30-point test including orientation, word recall, and math items adapted from the Saint Louis University Mental Status test, modified versions of the Stroop and Trails tasks, and other assessments of visuospatial function and memory. English-speaking neurology clinic patients and their partners 50 to 89 years of age were given SATURN, the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA), and a brief survey about test preferences. For patients recruited from dementia clinics (n = 23), clinical status was quantified with the Clinical Dementia Rating (CDR) scale. Care partners (n = 37) were assigned CDR = 0.ResultsSATURN and MoCA scores were highly correlated (P < .00001; r = 0.90). CDR sum-of-boxes scores were well-correlated with both tests (P < .00001) (r = -0.83 and -0.86, respectively). Statistically, neither test was superior. Most participants (83%) reported that SATURN was easy to use, and most either preferred SATURN over the MoCA (47%) or had no preference (32%).DiscussionPerformance on SATURN-a fully self-administered and freely available (https://doi.org/10.5061/dryad.02v6wwpzr) cognitive screening test-is well-correlated with MoCA and CDR scores.
| S-EPMC7771179 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundCognitive testing in large population surveys is frequently used to describe cognitive aging and determine the incidence rates, risk factors, and long-term trajectories of the development of cognitive impairment. As these surveys are increasingly administered on internet-based platforms, web-based and self-administered cognitive testing calls for close investigation.ObjectiveWeb-based, self-administered versions of 2 age-sensitive cognitive tests, the Stop and Go Switching Task for executive functioning and the Figure Identification test for perceptual speed, were developed and administered to adult participants in the Understanding America Study. We examined differences in cognitive test scores across internet device types and the extent to which the scores were associated with self-reported distractions in everyday environments in which the participants took the tests. In addition, national norms were provided for the US population.MethodsData were collected from a probability-based internet panel representative of the US adult population-the Understanding America Study. Participants with access to both a keyboard- and mouse-based device and a touch screen-based device were asked to complete the cognitive tests twice in a randomized order across device types, whereas participants with access to only 1 type of device were asked to complete the tests twice on the same device. At the end of each test, the participants answered questions about interruptions and potential distractions that occurred during the test.ResultsOf the 7410 (Stop and Go) and 7216 (Figure Identification) participants who completed the device ownership survey, 6129 (82.71% for Stop and Go) and 6717 (93.08% for Figure Identification) participants completed the first session and correctly responded to at least 70% of the trials. On average, the standardized differences across device types were small, with the absolute value of Cohen d ranging from 0.05 (for the switch score in Stop and Go and the Figure Identification score) to 0.13 (for the nonswitch score in Stop and Go). Poorer cognitive performance was moderately associated with older age (the absolute value of r ranged from 0.32 to 0.61), and this relationship was comparable across device types (the absolute value of Cohen q ranged from 0.01 to 0.17). Approximately 12.72% (779/6123 for Stop and Go) and 12.32% (828/6721 for Figure Identification) of participants were interrupted during the test. Interruptions predicted poorer cognitive performance (P<.01 for all scores). Specific distractions (eg, watching television and listening to music) were inconsistently related to cognitive performance. National norms, calculated as weighted average scores using sampling weights, suggested poorer cognitive performance as age increased.ConclusionsCognitive scores assessed by self-administered web-based tests were sensitive to age differences in cognitive performance and were comparable across the keyboard- and touch screen-based internet devices. Distraction in everyday environments, especially when interrupted during the test, may result in a nontrivial bias in cognitive testing.
| S-EPMC9127643 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:Computerized assessments are already used to derive accurate and reliable measures of cognitive function. Web-based cognitive assessment could improve the accessibility and flexibility of research and clinical assessment, widen participation, and promote research recruitment while simultaneously reducing costs. However, differences in context may influence task performance. OBJECTIVE:This study aims to determine the comparability of an unsupervised, web-based administration of the Cambridge Neuropsychological Test Automated Battery (CANTAB) against a typical in-person lab-based assessment, using a within-subjects counterbalanced design. The study aims to test (1) reliability, quantifying the relationship between measurements across settings using correlational approaches; (2) equivalence, the extent to which test results in different settings produce similar overall results; and (3) agreement, by quantifying acceptable limits to bias and differences between measurement environments. METHODS:A total of 51 healthy adults (32 women and 19 men; mean age 36.8, SD 15.6 years) completed 2 testing sessions, which were completed on average 1 week apart (SD 4.5 days). Assessments included equivalent tests of emotion recognition (emotion recognition task [ERT]), visual recognition (pattern recognition memory [PRM]), episodic memory (paired associate learning [PAL]), working memory and spatial planning (spatial working memory [SWM] and one touch stockings of Cambridge), and sustained attention (rapid visual information processing [RVP]). Participants were randomly allocated to one of the two groups, either assessed in-person in the laboratory first (n=33) or with unsupervised web-based assessments on their personal computing systems first (n=18). Performance indices (errors, correct trials, and response sensitivity) and median reaction times were extracted. Intraclass and bivariate correlations examined intersetting reliability, linear mixed models and Bayesian paired sample t tests tested for equivalence, and Bland-Altman plots examined agreement. RESULTS:Intraclass correlation (ICC) coefficients ranged from ?=0.23-0.67, with high correlations in 3 performance indices (from PAL, SWM, and RVP tasks; ??0.60). High ICC values were also seen for reaction time measures from 2 tasks (PRM and ERT tasks; ??0.60). However, reaction times were slower during web-based assessments, which undermined both equivalence and agreement for reaction time measures. Performance indices did not differ between assessment settings and generally showed satisfactory agreement. CONCLUSIONS:Our findings support the comparability of CANTAB performance indices (errors, correct trials, and response sensitivity) in unsupervised, web-based assessments with in-person and laboratory tests. Reaction times are not as easily translatable from in-person to web-based testing, likely due to variations in computer hardware. The results underline the importance of examining more than one index to ascertain comparability, as high correlations can present in the context of systematic differences, which are a product of differences between measurement environments. Further work is now needed to examine web-based assessments in clinical populations and in larger samples to improve sensitivity for detecting subtler differences between test settings.
| S-EPMC7435628 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Web-based instruments are being increasingly used in nutrition epidemiology and surveillance. However, the extent to which dietary intake estimates derived from web-based 24-h recalls such as the R24W are consistent with data derived from more traditional interviewer-administered 24-h recalls (TRAD) remains uncertain. Our objective was to compare dietary intake estimates obtained using the R24W and a TRAD instrument in population-based samples from the province of Québec in Canada. This comparison of dietary assessment methods was based on data from two sample survey studies in adults (18-65 years). The R24W was used in a sample of 1,147 French-speaking adults from five regions of Québec as part of the PREDISE (PRÉDicteurs Individuels, Sociaux et Environnementaux) study. The TRAD was used in a sample of 875 French-speaking adults from the Canadian Community Health Survey 2015 located in the same five regions. Characteristics of both samples were matched through selection and weighting (language, sex, age, region, education, body mass index, weekend day, and season of survey). Mean and usual intake data of each sample were compared. The plausibility of reported energy intakes was compared using predictive equations of the Institute of Medicine. Mean servings/day from the R24W were higher than with TRAD for vegetables and fruit (+11%, P = 0.003), grain products (+7%, P = 0.06), milk and alternatives (+21%, P < 0.001), and meat and alternatives (+18%, P = 0.001). Intake of low nutritive value foods was also 28% higher with the R24W than with TRAD (mean difference +164 kcal; 95% CI, 107-222). As a result, total energy intakes from the R24W compared with TRAD were 18% higher in women (mean difference +325 kcal; 95% CI, 243-407) and 15% higher in men (mean difference +361 kcal; 95% CI 232-490). The prevalence of underreporting of energy intakes was 10% lower with the R24W than with TRAD (prevalence ratio 0.90; 95% CI, 0.86-0.94). In conclusion, differences between dietary assessment methods in the context of population-based surveys on nutrition have potentially important consequences on the quality of the data and should be carefully considered in future surveys and surveillance strategies.
| S-EPMC7481356 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionWeb-based cognitive tests have potential for standardized screening in neurodegenerative disorders. We examined accuracy and consistency of cCOG, a computerized cognitive tool, in detecting mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and dementia.MethodsClinical data of 306 cognitively normal, 120 mild cognitive impairment (MCI), and 69 dementia subjects from three European cohorts were analyzed. Global cognitive score was defined from standard neuropsychological tests and compared to the corresponding estimated score from the cCOG tool containing seven subtasks. The consistency of cCOG was assessed comparing measurements administered in clinical settings and in the home environment.ResultscCOG produced accuracies (receiver operating characteristic-area under the curve [ROC-AUC]) between 0.71 and 0.84 in detecting MCI and 0.86 and 0.94 in detecting dementia when administered at the clinic and at home. The accuracy was comparable to the results of standard neuropsychological tests (AUC 0.69-0.77 MCI/0.91-0.92 dementia).DiscussioncCOG provides a promising tool for detecting MCI and dementia with potential for a cost-effective approach including home-based cognitive assessments.
| S-EPMC7446945 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:Cognitive impairment is common in patients with multiple sclerosis (MS). Accurate and repeatable measures of cognition have the potential to be used as markers of disease activity. METHODS:We developed a 5-min computerized test to measure cognitive dysfunction in patients with MS. The proposed test - named the Integrated Cognitive Assessment (ICA) - is self-administered and language-independent. Ninety-one MS patients and 83 healthy controls (HC) took part in Substudy 1, in which each participant took the ICA test and the Brief International Cognitive Assessment for MS (BICAMS). We assessed ICA's test-retest reliability, its correlation with BICAMS, its sensitivity to discriminate patients with MS from the HC group, and its accuracy in detecting cognitive dysfunction. In Substudy 2, we recruited 48 MS patients, 38 of which had received an 8-week physical and cognitive rehabilitation programme and 10 MS patients who did not. We examined the association between the level of serum neurofilament light (NfL) in these patients and their ICA scores and Symbol Digit Modalities Test (SDMT) scores pre- and post-rehabilitation. RESULTS:The ICA demonstrated excellent test-retest reliability (r?=?0.94), with no learning bias, and showed a high level of convergent validity with BICAMS. The ICA was sensitive in discriminating the MS patients from the HC group, and demonstrated high accuracy (AUC?=?95%) in discriminating cognitively normal from cognitively impaired participants. Additionally, we found a strong association (r?=?-?0.79) between ICA score and the level of NfL in MS patients before and after rehabilitation. CONCLUSIONS:The ICA has the potential to be used as a digital marker of cognitive impairment and to monitor response to therapeutic interventions. In comparison to standard cognitive tools for MS, the ICA is shorter in duration, does not show a learning bias, and is independent of language.
| S-EPMC7236354 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:The use of valid dietary assessment methods is crucial to analyse adherence to dietary recommendations among pregnant women. This study aims to assess the relative validity of a self-administered Web-based 24-h dietary recall, the R24W, against a pen-paper 3-day food record (FR) among pregnant women. METHODS:Sixty (60) pregnant women recruited at 9.3?±?0.7 weeks of pregnancy in Quebec City completed, at each trimester, 3 R24W and a 3-day FR. Mean energy and nutrient intakes reported by both tools were compared using paired Student T-Tests. Pearson correlations were used to analyze the association between both methods. Agreement between the two methods was evaluated using cross-classification analyses, weighted kappa coefficients and Bland-Altman analyses. RESULTS:Pearson correlation coefficients were all significant, except for vitamin B12 (r?=?0.03; p?=?0.83) and ranged from 0.27 to 0.76 (p?<?0.05). Differences between mean intakes assessed by the R24W and the FR did not exceed 10% in 19 variables and were not significant for 16 out of 26 variables. In cross-classification analyses, the R24W ranked, on average, 79.1% of participants in the same or adjacent quartiles as the FR. CONCLUSIONS:Compared to a 3-day FR, the R24W is a valid method to assess intakes of energy and most nutrients but may be less accurate in the evaluation of intakes of fat (as a proportion of energy intake), vitamin D, zinc and folic acid. During pregnancy, the R24W was a more accurate tool at a group-level than at an individual-level and should, therefore, be used in an epidemiological rather than a clinical setting. The R24W may be particularly valuable as a tool used in cohort studies to provide valid information on pregnant women's dietary intakes and facilitate evaluation of associations between diet and adverse pregnancy outcomes.
| S-EPMC5913813 | biostudies-literature