4.7 Article

Performance of the CogState computerized battery in the Mayo Clinic Study on Aging

Journal

ALZHEIMERS & DEMENTIA
Volume 11, Issue 11, Pages 1367-1376

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1016/j.jalz.2015.01.008

Keywords

Computerized cognitive battery; Epidemiology; Neuropsychology; Cognitively normal; Mild cognitive impairment; Population-based cohort study

Funding

  1. National Institutes of Health/National Institute on Aging [P50 AG016574, U01 AG006786, R01 AG041851, R01 AG011378]
  2. Robert H. and Clarice Smith and Abigail van Buren Alzheimer's Disease Research Program
  3. Walter S. and Lucienne Driskill Foundation
  4. Rochester Epidemiology Project [R01 AG034676]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Introduction: The feasibility and validity of brief computerized cognitive batteries at the population-level are unknown. Methods: Nondemented participants (n = 1660, age 50-97 years) in the Mayo Clinic Study on Aging completed the computerized CogState battery and standard neuropsychological battery. The correlation between tests was examined and comparisons between CogState performance on the personal computer (PC) and iPad (n = 331), and in the clinic vs. at home (n = 194), were assessed. Results: We obtained valid data on greater than 97% of participants on each test. Correlations between the CogState and neuropsychological tests ranged from 20.462 to 0.531. Although absolute differences between the PC and iPad were small and participants preferred the iPad, performance on the PC was faster. Participants performed faster on Detection, One Card Learning, and One Back at home compared with the clinic. Discussion: The computerized CogState battery, especially the iPad, was feasible, acceptable, and valid in the population. (C) 2015 The Alzheimer's Association. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available