Reliability, Validity, and User-Experience of Remote Unsupervised Computerized Neuropsychological Assessments in Community-Living 55- to 75-Year-Olds

Author:

Kochan Nicole A.1,Heffernan Megan1,Valenzuela Michael12,Sachdev Perminder S.134,Lam Ben C.P.1,Fiatarone Singh Maria56,Anstey Kaarin J.784,Chau Tiffany1,Brodaty Henry14

Affiliation:

1. Centre for Healthy Brain Ageing (CHeBA), Discipline of Psychiatry and Mental Health, UNSW Medicine and Health, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia

2. Skin2Neuron Pty Ltd, Sydney, Australia

3. Neuropsychiatric Institute, The Prince of Wales Hospital, Sydney, Australia

4. UNSW Ageing Futures Institute, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia

5. Sydney School of Health Sciences and Sydney Medical School, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia

6. Hinda and Arthur Marcus Institute for Aging Research, Hebrew SeniorLife, Boston, MA, USA

7. School of Psychology, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia

8. Neuroscience Research Australia, Sydney, Australia

Abstract

Background: Self-administered computerized neuropsychological assessments (CNAs) provide lower cost, more accessible alternatives to traditional in-person assessments but lack critical information on psychometrics and subjective experience of older adults in remote testing environments. Objective: We used an online brief battery of computerized tasks selected from the Cogstate Brief Battery (CBB) and Cambridge Brain Sciences (CBS) to 1) determine test-retest reliability in an unsupervised setting; 2) examine convergent validity with a comprehensive ‘gold standard’ paper-and-pencil neuropsychological test battery administered in-person; and 3) explore user-experience of remote computerized testing and individual tests. Methods: Fifty-two participants (mean age 65.8±5.7 years) completed CBB and CBS tests on their own computer, unsupervised from home, on three occasions, and visited a research center for an in-person paper-and-pencil assessment. They also completed a user-experience questionnaire. Results: Test-retest reliabilities varied for individual measures (ICCs = 0.20 to 0.83). Global cognition composites showed excellent reliability (ICCs > 0.8 over 1-month follow-up). A strong relationship between a combination of CNA measures and paper-and-pencil battery was found (canonical correlation R = 0.87, p = 0.04). Most tests were rated as enjoyable with easy-to-understand instructions. Ratings of general experience with online testing were mostly favorable; few had difficulty concentrating (17%) or using the computer for tasks (10%), although over one-third experienced performance anxiety (38%). Conclusion: A combined brief online battery selected from two CNAs demonstrated robust psychometric standards for reliability (global composite), and convergent validity with a gold standard battery, and mostly good usability and acceptability in the remote testing environment.

Publisher

IOS Press

Subject

Psychiatry and Mental health,Geriatrics and Gerontology,Clinical Psychology,General Medicine,General Neuroscience

Cited by 1 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3