Home › Research › Cognitive tests and assessment
A Computerized Cognitive Test Battery for Detection of Dementia and Mild Cognitive Impairment: Instrument Validation Study
Ye S, Sun K, Huynh D, Phi HQ, Ko B, Huang B, Hosseini Ghomi R.. JMIR aging, 2022-04-15
Topic: Brain imaging, connectivity and assessment
Background Early detection of dementia is critical for intervention and care planning but remains difficult. Computerized cognitive testing provides an accessible and promising solution to address these current challenges. Objective The aim of this study was to evaluate a computerized cognitive testing battery (BrainCheck) for its diagnostic accuracy and ability to distinguish the severity of cognitive impairment. Methods A total of 99 participants diagnosed with dementia, mild cognitive impairment (MCI), or normal cognition (NC) completed the BrainCheck battery. Statistical analyses compared participant performances on BrainCheck based on their diagnostic group. Results BrainCheck battery performance showed significant differences between the NC, MCI, and dementia groups, achieving 88% or higher sensitivity and specificity (ie, true positive and true negative rates) for separating dementia from NC, and 77% or higher sensitivity and specificity in separating the MCI group from the NC and dementia groups. Three-group classification found true positive rates of 80% or higher for the NC and dementia groups and true positive rates of 64% or higher for the MCI group. Conclusions BrainCheck was able to distinguish between diagnoses of dementia, MCI, and NC, providing a potentially reliable tool for early detection of cognitive impairment.
Key findings
- Results BrainCheck battery performance showed significant differences between the NC, MCI, and dementia groups, achieving 88% or higher sensitivity and specificity (ie, true positive and true negative rates) for separating dementia from NC, and 77% or higher sensitivity and specificity in separating the MCI group from the NC and dementia groups.
Study details
- Participants99
- Evidence strengthLow
How this study scored 50/100
Published in a peer-reviewed journal. Scored zero for study design, effect reported and randomised / blinded because the record does not state it. We have no data on journal's citation record, times cited, citations per year, impact for its field and year, cited by studies here, still being cited, senior author's track record, institution's track record and multi-centre collaboration, so those were left out: it earned 29 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 50 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 7 / 10 | Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (JMIR aging) |
| Journal's citation record | — / 4 | No journal record from OpenAlex — left out of this score |
| Study design | 0 / 12 | No study design recorded — scores zero, not guessed (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Strength of evidence | 1 / 5 | Rated “low” in our summary |
| Peer-review validation | 10 / 10 | Peer-reviewed. Published as an article in a named peer-reviewed journal. |
| How recent | 3 / 5 | 2022 — within 6 year(s) of the newest study here |
| Sample size | 1 / 4 | 99 participants |
| Effect reported | 0 / 3 | No effect size reported — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Studied in people | 3 / 3 | Studied in people (participant count stated) |
| Randomised / blinded | 0 / 2 | No randomisation or blinding stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Times cited | — / 7 | No citation count (not found in OpenAlex) — left out of this score |
| Citations per year | — / 5 | No citation count or no year — left out of this score |
| Impact for its field and year | — / 6 | No field-weighted citation impact (OpenAlex has none yet) — left out of this score |
| Cited by studies here | — / 6 | Not yet checked against this library's citation graph — left out of this score |
| Still being cited | — / 4 | No yearly citation counts — left out of this score |
| Senior author's track record | — / 4 | Senior author's record not available — left out of this score |
| Institution's track record | — / 3 | No institution listed in OpenAlex — left out of this score |
| Multi-centre collaboration | — / 3 | Institutions not listed — left out of this score |
| Indexed in PubMed | 2 / 2 | Indexed in PubMed (PMID 35436212) |
| Free to read | 2 / 2 | Free to read |
| Points | 29 / 58 | Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 29 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 50 out of 100. |
| Total | 50 / 100 | — |
What each of these 20 components measures, and what this score is not →
Read the original
Free copy unknown: no free-copy check has an answer for this record yet. That does not mean it is paywalled.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
Built from the record alzhub holds for this paper, not looked up. Volume, issue and page numbers are not held in the record. The record names 7 authors; APA and Vancouver show the first six, BibTeX and the downloads carry all of them. Check the citation against the original before you use it.
APA 7th
Ye, S., Sun, K., Huynh, D., Phi, H. Q., Ko, B., Huang, B., et al. (2022). A Computerized Cognitive Test Battery for Detection of Dementia and Mild Cognitive Impairment: Instrument Validation Study. JMIR aging. https://doi.org/10.2196/36825
Vancouver
Ye S, Sun K, Huynh D, Phi HQ, Ko B, Huang B, et al. A Computerized Cognitive Test Battery for Detection of Dementia and Mild Cognitive Impairment: Instrument Validation Study. JMIR aging. 2022. doi:10.2196/36825. PMID: 35436212.
BibTeX
@article{ye2022-35436212,
author = {Ye, S. and Sun, K. and Huynh, D. and Phi, H. Q. and Ko, B. and Huang, B. and Hosseini Ghomi, R.},
title = {{A Computerized Cognitive Test Battery for Detection of Dementia and Mild Cognitive Impairment: Instrument Validation Study}},
journal = {JMIR aging},
year = {2022},
doi = {10.2196/36825},
pmid = {35436212},
url = {https://doi.org/10.2196/36825}
}
Related studies in Cognitive tests and assessment
Also tagged “computerized”
238 studies in the library carry the topic tag “computerized”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 238 tagged studies.