Dataset Information

Validation of a rapid remote digital test for impaired cognition using clinical dementia rating and mini-mental state examination: An observational research study.

ABSTRACT:

Background

The Clinical Dementia Rating (CDR) and Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) are useful screening tools for mild cognitive impairment (MCI). However, these tests require qualified in-person supervision and the CDR can take up to 60 min to complete. We developed a digital cognitive screening test (M-CogScore) that can be completed remotely in under 5 min without supervision. We set out to validate M-CogScore in head-to-head comparisons with CDR and MMSE.

Methods

To ascertain the validity of the M-CogScore, we enrolled participants as healthy controls or impaired cognition, matched for age, sex, and education. Participants completed the 30-item paper MMSE Second Edition Standard Version (MMSE-2), paper CDR, and smartphone-based M-CogScore. The digital M-CogScore test is based on time-normalised scores from smartphone-adapted Stroop (M-Stroop), digit-symbols (M-Symbols), and delayed recall tests (M-Memory). We used Spearman's correlation coefficient to determine the convergent validity between M-CogScore and the 30-item MMSE-2, and non-parametric tests to determine its discriminative validity with a CDR label of normal (CDR 0) or impaired cognition (CDR 0.5 or 1). M-CogScore was further compared to MMSE-2 using area under the receiver operating characteristic curves (AUC) with corresponding optimal cut-offs.

Results

72 participants completed all three tests. The M-CogScore correlated with both MMSE-2 (rho = 0.54, p < 0.0001) and impaired cognition on CDR (Mann Whitney U = 187, p < 0.001). M-CogScore achieved an AUC of 0.85 (95% bootstrapped CI [0.80, 0.91]), when differentiating between normal and impaired cognition, compared to an AUC of 0.78 [0.72, 0.84] for MMSE-2 (p = 0.21).

Conclusion

Digital screening tests such as M-CogScore are desirable to aid in rapid and remote clinical cognitive evaluations. M-CogScore was significantly correlated with established cognitive tests, including CDR and MMSE-2. M-CogScore can be taken remotely without supervision, is automatically scored, has less of a ceiling effect than the MMSE-2, and takes significantly less time to complete.

SUBMITTER: Alim-Marvasti A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9811948 | biostudies-literature | 2022

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Validation of a rapid remote digital test for impaired cognition using clinical dementia rating and mini-mental state examination: An observational research study.

Alim-Marvasti Ali A Kuleindiren Narayan N Harvey Kirsten K Ciocca Matteo M Lin Aaron A Selim Hamzah H Mahmud Mohammad M

Frontiers in digital health 20221221

<h4>Background</h4>The Clinical Dementia Rating (CDR) and Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) are useful screening tools for mild cognitive impairment (MCI). However, these tests require qualified in-person supervision and the CDR can take up to 60 min to complete. We developed a digital cognitive screening test (M-CogScore) that can be completed remotely in under 5 min without supervision. We set out to validate M-CogScore in head-to-head comparisons with CDR and MMSE.<h4>Methods</h4>To ascert ...[more]

PMID: 36620187

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThe Mini-Mental State Examination-Second Edition (MMSE-2) consists of three visions: a brief version (MMSE-2:BV), a standard version (MMSE-2:SV), and an expanded version (MMSE-2: EV). Each version was equipped with alternate forms (blue and red). There was a lack of evidence on the practice effect and test-retest reliability of the three versions of the MMSE-2, limiting its utility in both clinical and research settings. The purpose of this study was to examine the practice effect and test-retest reliability of the MMSE-2 in people with dementia.MethodsOne hundred and twenty participants were enrolled, of which 60 were administered with the blue form twice (i.e., the same-form group, [SF group]) and 60 were administered with the blue form first and then the red form (alternate-form group, [AF group]). The practice effect was evaluated using a paired t-test and Cohen's d. The test-retest reliability was examined using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC).ResultsFor the practice effects, in the SF group, no statistically significant differences were found for the MMSE-2:BV and MMSE-2: EV total scores and eight subtests (p = 0.061-1.000), except for the MMSE-2:SV total score (p = 0.029). In the AF group, no statistically significant differences were found for all three versions of the total scores and subtests (p = 0.106-1.000), except for the visual-constructional ability subtest (p = 0.010). Cohen's d of all three versions' total scores and subtests were 0.00-0.20 and 0.00-0.26 for SF group and AF group, respectively. For the test-retest reliability, ICC values for all three versions and eight subtests in SF and AF groups were 0.60-0.93 and 0.56-0.93, respectively.ConclusionOur results demonstrated that the practice effect could be minimized when alternate forms of the MMSE-2 were used. The MMSE-2 had good to excellent test-retest reliability, except for three subtests (i.e., visual-constructional ability, registration, and recall). Caution should be taken when interpreting the results of visual-constructional ability, registration, and recall subtests of the MMSE-2.

Project description:BackgroundDisease-modifying treatments for Alzheimer's disease highlight the need for early detection of cognitive decline. However, at present, most primary care providers do not perform routine cognitive testing, in part due to a lack of access to practical cognitive assessments, as well as time and resources to administer and interpret the tests. Brief and sensitive digital cognitive assessments, such as the Digital Clock and Recall (DCR™), have the potential to address this need. Here, we examine the advantages of DCR over the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) in detecting mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and mild dementia.MethodsWe studied 706 participants from the multisite Bio-Hermes study (age mean ± SD = 71.5 ± 6.7; 58.9% female; years of education mean ± SD = 15.4 ± 2.7; primary language English), classified as cognitively unimpaired (CU; n = 360), mild cognitive impairment (MCI; n = 234), or probable mild Alzheimer's dementia (pAD; n = 111) based on a review of medical history with selected cognitive and imaging tests. We evaluated cognitive classifications (MCI and early dementia) based on the DCR and the MMSE against cohorts based on the results of the Rey Auditory Verbal Learning Test (RAVLT), the Trail Making Test-Part B (TMT-B), and the Functional Activities Questionnaire (FAQ). We also compared the influence of demographic variables such as race (White vs. Non-White), ethnicity (Hispanic vs. Non-Hispanic), and level of education (≥ 15 years vs. < 15 years) on the DCR and MMSE scores.ResultsThe DCR was superior on average to the MMSE in classifying mild cognitive impairment and early dementia, AUC = 0.70 for the DCR vs. 0.63 for the MMSE. DCR administration was also significantly faster (completed in less than 3 min regardless of cognitive status and age). Among 104 individuals who were labeled as "cognitively unimpaired" by the MMSE (score ≥ 28) but actually had verbal memory impairment as confirmed by the RAVLT, the DCR identified 84 (80.7%) as impaired. Moreover, the DCR score was significantly less biased by ethnicity than the MMSE, with no significant difference in the DCR score between Hispanic and non-Hispanic individuals.ConclusionsDCR outperforms the MMSE in detecting and classifying cognitive impairment-in a fraction of the time-while being not influenced by a patient's ethnicity. The results support the utility of DCR as a sensitive and efficient cognitive assessment in primary care settings.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT04733989.

Project description:BackgroundDementia is characterized by impairments in an individual's cognitive and functional abilities. Digital cognitive assessments have been shown to be effective in detecting mild cognitive impairment and dementia, but whether they can stage the disease remains to be studied.ObjectiveIn this study, we examined (1) the correlation between scores obtained from BrainCheck standard battery of cognitive assessments (BC-Assess), a digital cognitive assessment, and scores obtained from the Dementia Severity Rating Scale (DSRS), and (2) the accuracy of using the BC-Assess score to predict dementia stage delineated by the DSRS score. We also explored whether BC-Assess can be combined with information from the Katz Index of Independence in activities of daily living (ADL) to obtain enhanced accuracy.MethodsRetrospective analysis was performed on a BrainCheck dataset containing 1751 patients with dementia with different cognitive and functional assessments completed for cognitive care planning, including the DSRS, the ADL, and the BC-Assess. The patients were staged according to their DSRS total score (DSRS-TS): 982 mild (DSRS-TS 10-18), 656 moderate (DSRS-TS 19-26), and 113 severe (DSRS-TS 37-54) patients. Pearson correlation was used to assess the associations between BC-Assess overall score (BC-OS), ADL total score (ADL-TS), and DSRS-TS. Logistic regression was used to evaluate the possibility of using patients' BC-OS and ADL-TS to predict their stage.ResultsWe found moderate Pearson correlations between DSRS-TS and BC-OS (r=-0.53), between DSRS-TS and ADL-TS (r=-0.55), and a weak correlation between BC-OS and ADL-TS (r=0.37). Both BC-OS and ADL-TS significantly decreased with increasing severity. BC-OS demonstrated to be a good predictor of dementia stages, with an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (ROC-AUC) of classification using logistic regression ranging from .733 to .917. When BC-Assess was combined with ADL, higher prediction accuracies were achieved, with an ROC-AUC ranging from 0.786 to 0.961.ConclusionsOur results suggest that BC-Assess could serve as an effective alternative tool to DSRS for grading dementia severity, particularly in cases where DSRS, or other global assessments, may be challenging to obtain due to logistical and time constraints.

Dataset Information

Validation of a rapid remote digital test for impaired cognition using clinical dementia rating and mini-mental state examination: An observational research study.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Publications

Validation of a rapid remote digital test for impaired cognition using clinical dementia rating and mini-mental state examination: An observational research study.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets