BACKGROUND: Computerized cognitive testing has the potential to be an effective way to assess and monitor cognition in large neuroepidemiological studies. CogState is a game-like computerized test with demonstrated validity and reliability that has shown sensitivity to decline in older individuals over time. This study aimed to evaluate the serial usability of the test specifically within an older community cohort. METHODS: The test battery was administered to healthy volunteers aged 50 years and above at 3-month intervals over 12 months in a community setting. Test usability was examined in terms of acceptability, efficiency and stability. RESULTS: Of 301 subjects (age: 61.9 +/- 7.2 years), 87% completed the study. In addition, 85% completed the first test within the allowed time and passed integrity criteria with their performance improving and stabilizing at subsequent visits. The computerized battery required 15 min for administration on average, allowing 263 patients to be assessed on 5 occasions by 2 assessors. All tasks showed stability and a high test-retest reliability with serial administration. CONCLUSIONS: This computerized test was shown to have good acceptability, efficiency and stability for the repeated assessment of cognitive function in older people. Together with its demonstrated sensitivity to cognitive impairment and cognitive change, these data suggest that it would be a useful tool for application in neuroepidemiological studies. Copyright 2009 S. Karger AG, Basel.
BACKGROUND: Computerized cognitive testing has the potential to be an effective way to assess and monitor cognition in large neuroepidemiological studies. CogState is a game-like computerized test with demonstrated validity and reliability that has shown sensitivity to decline in older individuals over time. This study aimed to evaluate the serial usability of the test specifically within an older community cohort. METHODS: The test battery was administered to healthy volunteers aged 50 years and above at 3-month intervals over 12 months in a community setting. Test usability was examined in terms of acceptability, efficiency and stability. RESULTS: Of 301 subjects (age: 61.9 +/- 7.2 years), 87% completed the study. In addition, 85% completed the first test within the allowed time and passed integrity criteria with their performance improving and stabilizing at subsequent visits. The computerized battery required 15 min for administration on average, allowing 263 patients to be assessed on 5 occasions by 2 assessors. All tasks showed stability and a high test-retest reliability with serial administration. CONCLUSIONS: This computerized test was shown to have good acceptability, efficiency and stability for the repeated assessment of cognitive function in older people. Together with its demonstrated sensitivity to cognitive impairment and cognitive change, these data suggest that it would be a useful tool for application in neuroepidemiological studies. Copyright 2009 S. Karger AG, Basel.
Authors: Dustin Hammers; Elizabeth Spurgeon; Kelly Ryan; Carol Persad; Judith Heidebrink; Nancy Barbas; Roger Albin; Kirk Frey; David Darby; Bruno Giordani Journal: Am J Alzheimers Dis Other Demen Date: 2011-06-01 Impact factor: 2.035
Authors: Michelle M Mielke; Stephen D Weigand; Heather J Wiste; Prashanthi Vemuri; Mary M Machulda; Davis S Knopman; Val Lowe; Rosebud O Roberts; Kejal Kantarci; Walter A Rocca; Clifford R Jack; Ronald C Petersen Journal: Alzheimers Dement Date: 2014-11-15 Impact factor: 21.566
Authors: Jennifer A Sumner; Kaitlin Hagan; Fran Grodstein; Andrea L Roberts; Brian Harel; Karestan C Koenen Journal: Depress Anxiety Date: 2017-01-10 Impact factor: 6.505
Authors: Chip Caine; Snehal Deshmukh; Vinai Gondi; Minesh Mehta; Wolfgang Tomé; Benjamin W Corn; Andrew Kanner; Howard Rowley; Vijayananda Kundapur; Albert DeNittis; Jeffrey Noah Greenspoon; Andre A Konski; Glenn S Bauman; Adam Raben; Wenyin Shi; Merideth Wendland; Lisa Kachnic Journal: J Neurooncol Date: 2015-10-28 Impact factor: 4.130
Authors: Samuel T Wilkinson; Rachel B Katz; Mesut Toprak; Ryan Webler; Robert B Ostroff; Gerard Sanacora Journal: J Clin Psychiatry Date: 2018-07-24 Impact factor: 4.384
Authors: Alyssa A Gamaldo; Shyuan Ching Tan; Angie L Sardina; Carolyn Henzi; Rosalyn Guest; Lesley A Ross; Kurtis Willingham; Alan B Zonderman; Ross A Andel Journal: J Gerontol B Psychol Sci Soc Sci Date: 2020-08-13 Impact factor: 4.077
Authors: Annie M Racine; Lindsay R Clark; Sara E Berman; Rebecca L Koscik; Kimberly D Mueller; Derek Norton; Christopher R Nicholas; Kaj Blennow; Henrik Zetterberg; Bruno Jedynak; Murat Bilgel; Cynthia M Carlsson; Bradley T Christian; Sanjay Asthana; Sterling C Johnson Journal: J Alzheimers Dis Date: 2016-10-18 Impact factor: 4.472
Authors: Paul Lochhead; Kaitlin Hagan; Amit D Joshi; Hamed Khalili; Long H Nguyen; Francine Grodstein; Andrew T Chan Journal: Gastroenterology Date: 2017-07-18 Impact factor: 22.682
Authors: Mark A Espeland; Jeffrey A Katula; Julia Rushing; Arthur F Kramer; Janine M Jennings; Kaycee M Sink; Neelesh K Nadkarni; Kieran F Reid; Cynthia M Castro; Timothy Church; Diana R Kerwin; Jeff D Williamson; Richard A Marottoli; Scott Rushing; Michael Marsiske; Stephen R Rapp Journal: Int J Geriatr Psychiatry Date: 2013-04-16 Impact factor: 3.485