Rxivist logo

Validity of Computer Based Administration of Cognitive Assessments compared to Traditional Paper-based Administration

By Siao Ye, Brian Ko, Huy Phi, David Eagleman, Benjamin Flores, Yael Katz, Bin Huang, Reza Hosseini Ghomi

Posted 16 May 2020
medRxiv DOI: 10.1101/2020.05.12.20099507

Traditional pen and paper based neuropsychological tests (NPT) for cognition assessment have several challenges limiting their use. They are time consuming, expensive, and require highly trained specialists to administer. This leads to testing being available to only a small portion of the population and often with wait times of several months. In clinical practice, we have found results tend not to be integrated effectively into assessment and plans of the ordering provider. Here we compared several tests using BrainCheck (BC), a computer-based NPT battery, to traditional paper-based NPT, by evaluating individual tests as well as comparing composite scores to scores on traditional screening tools. 26 volunteers took both paper-based tests and BC. We found scores of four assessments (Ravens Matrix, Digit Symbol Modulation, Stroop Color Word Test and Trails Making A&B Test) were highly correlated. The Balance Examination and Immediate/Delayed Hopkins Verbal Learning, however, were not correlated. The BC composite score was correlated to results of the Saint Louis University Mental Status (SLUMS) exam [1], the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) [2], and the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA). Our results suggest BC may offer a computer-based avenue to address the gap between basic screening and formal neuropsychological testing.

Download data

  • Downloaded 689 times
  • Download rankings, all-time:
    • Site-wide: 58,468
    • In psychiatry and clinical psychology: 248
  • Year to date:
    • Site-wide: 39,657
  • Since beginning of last month:
    • Site-wide: 57,138

Altmetric data

Downloads over time

Distribution of downloads per paper, site-wide