Home › Research › Cognitive tests and assessment
Validity of the Tablet-Based Digital Cognitive Test (SCST) in Identifying Different Degrees of Cognitive Impairment
Dayeong An, Joon Soo Shin, Nanyoung Bae, Sang Won Seo, Duk L Na. Journal of Korean medical science, 2024-09-30
Topic: Brain imaging, connectivity and assessment
The SCST total score, cognitive domain scores (attention, language, visuospatial function, memory, executive function), and most of the subtest scores decreased significantly in the order of SCD, MCI and dementia. Likewise, the differences in SCST scores between CDR levels were significant, particularly in distinguishing between CDR 0.5 and CDR 1. This study reaffirmed that the SCST can significantly discriminate between groups of individuals with SCD, MCI, and dementia based on a large sample. Furthermore, differences in SCT scores were found across the levels of CDR, confirming the clinical utility of the SCST. These findings suggest that the SCST is an efficient and useful neuropsychological test for the sensitive detection of early cognitive impairment.
Key findings
- The SCST total score, cognitive domain scores (attention, language, visuospatial function, memory, executive function), and most of the subtest scores decreased significantly in the order of SCD, MCI and dementia.
- Likewise, the differences in SCST scores between CDR levels were significant, particularly in distinguishing between CDR 0.5 and CDR 1.
- This study reaffirmed that the SCST can significantly discriminate between groups of individuals with SCD, MCI, and dementia based on a large sample.
- Furthermore, differences in SCT scores were found across the levels of CDR, confirming the clinical utility of the SCST.
- These findings suggest that the SCST is an efficient and useful neuropsychological test for the sensitive detection of early cognitive impairment.
Study details
- Participants254
- Evidence strengthLow
How this study scored 52/100
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 29 of the 56 points we could judge it on, which is 52 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 7 / 10 | Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Journal of Korean medical science) |
| 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 | 4 / 5 | 2024 — within 3 year(s) of the newest study here |
| Sample size | 2 / 4 | 254 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 39355949) |
| Free to read | — / 2 | Access not recorded — left out of this score |
| Points | 29 / 56 | Scored on 10 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 29 of the 56 points we could judge it on is 52 out of 100. |
| Total | 52 / 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
An, D., Shin, J. S., Bae, N., Seo, S. W., & Na, D. L. (2024). Validity of the Tablet-Based Digital Cognitive Test (SCST) in Identifying Different Degrees of Cognitive Impairment. Journal of Korean medical science. https://doi.org/10.3346/jkms.2024.39.e247
Vancouver
An D, Shin JS, Bae N, Seo SW, Na DL. Validity of the Tablet-Based Digital Cognitive Test (SCST) in Identifying Different Degrees of Cognitive Impairment. Journal of Korean medical science. 2024. doi:10.3346/jkms.2024.39.e247. PMID: 39355949.
BibTeX
@article{an2024-39355949,
author = {An, Dayeong and Shin, Joon Soo and Bae, Nanyoung and Seo, Sang Won and Na, Duk L},
title = {{Validity of the Tablet-Based Digital Cognitive Test (SCST) in Identifying Different Degrees of Cognitive Impairment}},
journal = {Journal of Korean medical science},
year = {2024},
doi = {10.3346/jkms.2024.39.e247},
pmid = {39355949},
url = {https://doi.org/10.3346/jkms.2024.39.e247}
}