Cargando…
Validation of a novel computerized cognitive function test for the rapid detection of mild cognitive impairment
BACKGROUND: In the present study, we examined the distinguishing ability of a mild cognitive impairment (MCI) assessment tool for rapid screening using a computer (MARC) for Alzheimer’s disease dementia (ADD), MCI, and non-demented controls (NDC) with no cognitive impairment, as well as its validity...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9727980/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36476188 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12883-022-02997-4 |
Sumario: | BACKGROUND: In the present study, we examined the distinguishing ability of a mild cognitive impairment (MCI) assessment tool for rapid screening using a computer (MARC) for Alzheimer’s disease dementia (ADD), MCI, and non-demented controls (NDC) with no cognitive impairment, as well as its validity and reliability, as part of a preliminary trial for the development of the tool. METHODS: A total of 64 participants (23 in the ADD group, 17 in the MCI group, and 24 in the NDC group) were analyzed. The participants were administered MARC and a pre-existing computerized Alzheimer’s dementia screening test (MSP), and 31 participants (14 in the MCI group, 17 in the NDC group) were readministered MARC within 4 months from the first test. RESULTS: 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). CONCLUSIONS: 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. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12883-022-02997-4. |
---|