Home › Research › Cognitive tests and assessment
Validation of a novel computerized cognitive function test for the rapid detection of mild cognitive impairment
Minoru Kouzuki, Madoka Miyamoto, Nobuto Tanaka, Katsuya Urakami. BMC neurology, 2022-12-07
Topic: Brain imaging, connectivity and assessment
The median (interquartile range) test time for MARC was 401 (350-453) s. Total MARC scores were significantly worse in the MCI and ADD groups than in the NDC group (p < 0.05 and p < 0.01, respectively). In the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis, the area under the ROC curve (AUC) when comparing the NDC and MCI groups was 0.866 (95% CI, 0.759-0.974), when comparing the NDC and AD groups was 0.989 (95% CI, 0.970-1.000), and when comparing the MCI and AD groups was 0.889 (95% CI, 0.790-0.988). Furthermore, there was a significant correlation with the results of the existing test, MSP (r = 0.839, p < 0.001). In addition, the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) (1,1) when the first and second MARC scores were compared was 0.740 (95% CI, 0.529-0.865; p < 0.001). MARC is considered capable of distinguishing MCI with high accuracy. The tool has good validity and reliability, and it can be administered in a short period of time without the need for a specialist.
Key findings
- The median (interquartile range) test time for MARC was 401 (350-453) s.
- Total MARC scores were significantly worse in the MCI and ADD groups than in the NDC group (p < 0.05 and p < 0.01, respectively).
- In the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis, the area under the ROC curve (AUC) when comparing the NDC and MCI groups was 0.866 (95% CI, 0.759-0.974), when comparing the NDC and AD groups was 0.989 (95% CI, 0.970-1.000), and when comparing the MCI and AD groups was 0.889 (95% CI, 0.790-0.988).
- Furthermore, there was a significant correlation with the results of the existing test, MSP (r = 0.839, p < 0.001).
- In addition, the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) (1,1) when the first and second MARC scores were compared was 0.740 (95% CI, 0.529-0.865; p < 0.001).
Study details
- Participants64
- Evidence strengthLow
How this study scored 48/100
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, multi-centre collaboration and free to read, so those were left out: it earned 27 of the 56 points we could judge it on, which is 48 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 7 / 10 | Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (BMC neurology) |
| 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 | 64 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 36476188) |
| Free to read | — / 2 | Access not recorded — left out of this score |
| Points | 27 / 56 | Scored on 10 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 27 of the 56 points we could judge it on is 48 out of 100. |
| Total | 48 / 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. Check the citation against the original before you use it.
APA 7th
Kouzuki, M., Miyamoto, M., Tanaka, N., & Urakami, K. (2022). Validation of a novel computerized cognitive function test for the rapid detection of mild cognitive impairment. BMC neurology. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12883-022-02997-4
Vancouver
Kouzuki M, Miyamoto M, Tanaka N, Urakami K. Validation of a novel computerized cognitive function test for the rapid detection of mild cognitive impairment. BMC neurology. 2022. doi:10.1186/s12883-022-02997-4. PMID: 36476188.
BibTeX
@article{kouzuki2022-36476188,
author = {Kouzuki, Minoru and Miyamoto, Madoka and Tanaka, Nobuto and Urakami, Katsuya},
title = {{Validation of a novel computerized cognitive function test for the rapid detection of mild cognitive impairment}},
journal = {BMC neurology},
year = {2022},
doi = {10.1186/s12883-022-02997-4},
pmid = {36476188},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1186/s12883-022-02997-4}
}
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.