Home › Research › Cognitive tests and assessment
Preliminary study of a novel cognitive assessment device for the evaluation of HIV-associated neurocognitive impairment
Anderson AM, Lennox JL, Nguyen ML, Waldrop-Valverde D, Tyor WR, Loring DW.. Journal of neurovirology, 2016-05-31
Topic: Risk, prevention and care in population studies
Given the high prevalence of HIV-associated neurocognitive disorders (HAND), we examined the performance of a novel computerized cognitive assessment device (NCAD) for the evaluation of neurocognitive impairment in the setting of HIV. In addition to a standard 8-test neuropsychological battery, each participant underwent testing with the NCAD, which requires approximately 20 min and has been shown to accurately measure neurocognition in elderly individuals. The NCAD yields seven subtest scores in addition to an overall predictive score that is calculated based on subtest results. Thirty-nine HIV-infected participants were included in this study; the majority of which (71.8 %) had undetectable plasma HIV RNA levels and a history of significant immunocompromise (median nadir CD4+ count 34 cells/μl). The mean composite neuropsychological score (NPT-8) was 46.07, and mean global deficit score (GDS) was 0.59. NCAD total subtest accuracy correlated significantly with NPT-8 (Pearson correlation r = 0.59, p < 0.0001) as well as GDS (Spearman's rho = -0.36, p = 0.02). NCAD predictive score also correlated significantly with NPT-8 (Spearman's rho = -0.5601, p = 0.0016) and GDS (Spearman's rho = 0.45, p = 0.0144). When using the most recent nosology of HAND criteria for neurocognitive impairment, the area under the curve (AUC) for NCAD total subtest accuracy was 0.7562 (p = 0.012), while the AUC for the HIV dementia scale was 0.508 (p = 0.930). While not as comprehensive as a full neuropsychological battery, the NCAD shows promise as a rapid screening tool for HIV-infected individuals, and additional research of this device is indicated.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Anderson, A. M., Lennox, J. L., Nguyen, M. L., Waldrop-Valverde, D., Tyor, W. R., & Loring, D. W. (2016). Preliminary study of a novel cognitive assessment device for the evaluation of HIV-associated neurocognitive impairment. Journal of neurovirology. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13365-016-0458-z
Vancouver
Anderson AM, Lennox JL, Nguyen ML, Waldrop-Valverde D, Tyor WR, Loring DW. Preliminary study of a novel cognitive assessment device for the evaluation of HIV-associated neurocognitive impairment. Journal of neurovirology. 2016. doi:10.1007/s13365-016-0458-z. PMID: 27245594.
BibTeX
@article{anderson2016-27245594,
author = {Anderson, A. M. and Lennox, J. L. and Nguyen, M. L. and Waldrop-Valverde, D. and Tyor, W. R. and Loring, D. W.},
title = {{Preliminary study of a novel cognitive assessment device for the evaluation of HIV-associated neurocognitive impairment}},
journal = {Journal of neurovirology},
year = {2016},
doi = {10.1007/s13365-016-0458-z},
pmid = {27245594},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1007/s13365-016-0458-z}
}
Built from the record alzhub holds for this paper, not looked up. Volume, issue and page numbers are not held in the record. Check the citation against the original before you use it.
Key findings
- The NCAD yields seven subtest scores in addition to an overall predictive score that is calculated based on subtest results.
- Thirty-nine HIV-infected participants were included in this study; the majority of which (71.8 %) had undetectable plasma HIV RNA levels and a history of significant immunocompromise (median nadir CD4+ count 34 cells/μl).
- NCAD total subtest accuracy correlated significantly with NPT-8 (Pearson correlation r = 0.59, p < 0.0001) as well as GDS (Spearman's rho = -0.36, p = 0.02).
- NCAD predictive score also correlated significantly with NPT-8 (Spearman's rho = -0.5601, p = 0.0016) and GDS (Spearman's rho = 0.45, p = 0.0144).
Study details
- Evidence strengthLow
How this study scored 36/100
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 21 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 36 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 7 / 10 | Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Journal of neurovirology) |
| 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 | 1 / 5 | 2016 — within 20 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 27245594) |
| Free to read | 0 / 2 | Behind a paywall — scores zero |
| Points | 21 / 58 | Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 21 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 36 out of 100. |
| Total | 36 / 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 “devices”
4 studies in the library carry the topic tag “devices”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 4 tagged studies.