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...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Kouzuki, Minoru, Miyamoto, Madoka, Tanaka, Nobuto, Urakami, Katsuya
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
_version_ 1784845146980876288
author Kouzuki, Minoru
Miyamoto, Madoka
Tanaka, Nobuto
Urakami, Katsuya
author_facet Kouzuki, Minoru
Miyamoto, Madoka
Tanaka, Nobuto
Urakami, Katsuya
author_sort Kouzuki, Minoru
collection PubMed
description 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.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9727980
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-97279802022-12-08 Validation of a novel computerized cognitive function test for the rapid detection of mild cognitive impairment Kouzuki, Minoru Miyamoto, Madoka Tanaka, Nobuto Urakami, Katsuya BMC Neurol Research 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. BioMed Central 2022-12-07 /pmc/articles/PMC9727980/ /pubmed/36476188 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12883-022-02997-4 Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
spellingShingle Research
Kouzuki, Minoru
Miyamoto, Madoka
Tanaka, Nobuto
Urakami, Katsuya
Validation of a novel computerized cognitive function test for the rapid detection of mild cognitive impairment
title Validation of a novel computerized cognitive function test for the rapid detection of mild cognitive impairment
title_full Validation of a novel computerized cognitive function test for the rapid detection of mild cognitive impairment
title_fullStr Validation of a novel computerized cognitive function test for the rapid detection of mild cognitive impairment
title_full_unstemmed Validation of a novel computerized cognitive function test for the rapid detection of mild cognitive impairment
title_short Validation of a novel computerized cognitive function test for the rapid detection of mild cognitive impairment
title_sort validation of a novel computerized cognitive function test for the rapid detection of mild cognitive impairment
topic Research
url 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
work_keys_str_mv AT kouzukiminoru validationofanovelcomputerizedcognitivefunctiontestfortherapiddetectionofmildcognitiveimpairment
AT miyamotomadoka validationofanovelcomputerizedcognitivefunctiontestfortherapiddetectionofmildcognitiveimpairment
AT tanakanobuto validationofanovelcomputerizedcognitivefunctiontestfortherapiddetectionofmildcognitiveimpairment
AT urakamikatsuya validationofanovelcomputerizedcognitivefunctiontestfortherapiddetectionofmildcognitiveimpairment