Home › Research › Cognitive tests and assessment
A Novel Computerized Cognitive Stress Test to Detect Mild Cognitive Impairment
Curiel Cid RE, Crocco EA, Kitaigorodsky M, Beaufils L, Peña PA, Grau G, Visser U, Loewenstein DA.. The journal of prevention of Alzheimer's disease, 2021-01-01
Topic: Risk, prevention and care in population studies
Background The Loewenstein Acevedo Scales of Semantic Interference and Learning (LASSI-L) is a novel and increasingly employed instrument that has outperformed widely used cognitive measures as an early correlate of elevated brain amyloid and neurodegeneration in prodromal Alzheimer's Disease (AD). The LASSI-L has distinguished those with amnestic mild cognitive impairment (aMCI) and high amyloid load from aMCI attributable to other non-AD conditions. The authors designed and implemented a web-based brief computerized version of the instrument, the LASSI-BC, to improve standardized administration, facilitate scoring accuracy, real-time data entry, and increase the accessibility of the measure. Objective The psychometric properties and clinical utility of the brief computerized version of the LASSI-L was evaluated, together with its ability to differentiate older adults who are cognitively normal (CN) from those with amnestic Mild Cognitive Impairment (aMCI). Methods After undergoing a comprehensive uniform clinical and neuropsychological evaluation using traditional measures, older adults were classified as cognitively normal or diagnosed with aMCI. All participants were administered the LASSI-BC, a computerized version of the LASSI-L. Test-retest and discriminant validity was assessed for each LASSI-BC subscale. Results LASSI-BC subscales demonstrated high test-retest reliability, and discriminant validity was attained. Conclusions The LASSI-BC, a brief computerized version of the LASSI-L is a valid and useful cognitive tool for the detection of aMCI among older adults.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Curiel Cid, R. E., Crocco, E. A., Kitaigorodsky, M., Beaufils, L., Peña, P. A., Grau, G., et al. (2021). A Novel Computerized Cognitive Stress Test to Detect Mild Cognitive Impairment. The journal of prevention of Alzheimer's disease. https://doi.org/10.14283/jpad.2021.1
Vancouver
Curiel Cid RE, Crocco EA, Kitaigorodsky M, Beaufils L, Peña PA, Grau G, et al. A Novel Computerized Cognitive Stress Test to Detect Mild Cognitive Impairment. The journal of prevention of Alzheimer's disease. 2021. doi:10.14283/jpad.2021.1. PMID: 33569559.
BibTeX
@article{curielcid2021-33569559,
author = {Curiel Cid, R. E. and Crocco, E. A. and Kitaigorodsky, M. and Beaufils, L. and Peña, P. A. and Grau, G. and Visser, U. and Loewenstein, D. A.},
title = {{A Novel Computerized Cognitive Stress Test to Detect Mild Cognitive Impairment}},
journal = {The journal of prevention of Alzheimer's disease},
year = {2021},
doi = {10.14283/jpad.2021.1},
pmid = {33569559},
url = {https://doi.org/10.14283/jpad.2021.1}
}
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 8 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.
Key findings
- Results LASSI-BC subscales demonstrated high test-retest reliability, and discriminant validity was attained.
Study details
- Evidence strengthLow
How this study scored 40/100
Published in a peer-reviewed journal. Scored zero for study design, sample size, effect reported, studied in people 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 23 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 40 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 7 / 10 | Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (The journal of prevention of Alzheimer's disease) |
| 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 | 2021 — within 6 year(s) of the newest study here |
| Sample size | 0 / 4 | Participant count not stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Effect reported | 0 / 3 | No effect size reported — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Studied in people | 0 / 3 | Not stated whether this was studied in people — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| 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 33569559) |
| Free to read | 0 / 2 | Behind a paywall — scores zero |
| Points | 23 / 58 | Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 23 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 40 out of 100. |
| Total | 40 / 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.
Related studies in Cognitive tests and assessment
Also tagged “detect”
5 studies in the library carry the topic tag “detect”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 5 tagged studies.