OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the short-term stability and reliability of a brief computerized cognitive battery in established dementia types. METHOD: Patients were administered the computerized battery twice with administrations approximately 2 hours apart, with intervening conventional neuropsychological tests. Patients were classified clinically, via consensus conference, as healthy controls (n = 23), mild cognitive impairment (n = 20), Alzheimer's disease (n = 52), dementia with Lewy Bodies ([DLB], n = 10), or frontotemporal dementia (n = 9). RESULTS: Minimal practice effects were evident across Cog-State test administrations. Small magnitude improvements were seen across all groups on a working memory task, and healthy controls showed a mild practice effect on the accuracy of associative learning. CONCLUSIONS: In established dementia, administration of the CogState tasks appears sensitive to cognitive impairment in dementia. Repeat administration also provided acceptable stability and test-retest reliability with minimal practice effects at short test-retest intervals despite intervening cognitive challenges.
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the short-term stability and reliability of a brief computerized cognitive battery in established dementia types. METHOD:Patients were administered the computerized battery twice with administrations approximately 2 hours apart, with intervening conventional neuropsychological tests. Patients were classified clinically, via consensus conference, as healthy controls (n = 23), mild cognitive impairment (n = 20), Alzheimer's disease (n = 52), dementia with Lewy Bodies ([DLB], n = 10), or frontotemporal dementia (n = 9). RESULTS: Minimal practice effects were evident across Cog-State test administrations. Small magnitude improvements were seen across all groups on a working memory task, and healthy controls showed a mild practice effect on the accuracy of associative learning. CONCLUSIONS: In established dementia, administration of the CogState tasks appears sensitive to cognitive impairment in dementia. Repeat administration also provided acceptable stability and test-retest reliability with minimal practice effects at short test-retest intervals despite intervening cognitive challenges.
Authors: D Neary; J S Snowden; L Gustafson; U Passant; D Stuss; S Black; M Freedman; A Kertesz; P H Robert; M Albert; K Boone; B L Miller; J Cummings; D F Benson Journal: Neurology Date: 1998-12 Impact factor: 9.910
Authors: C C Rowe; S Ng; U Ackermann; S J Gong; K Pike; G Savage; T F Cowie; K L Dickinson; P Maruff; D Darby; C Smith; M Woodward; J Merory; H Tochon-Danguy; G O'Keefe; W E Klunk; C A Mathis; J C Price; C L Masters; V L Villemagne Journal: Neurology Date: 2007-05-15 Impact factor: 9.910
Authors: Henry Engler; Alexander Frizell Santillo; Shu Xia Wang; Maria Lindau; Irina Savitcheva; Agneta Nordberg; Lars Lannfelt; Bengt Långström; Lena Kilander Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2007-09-11 Impact factor: 9.236
Authors: Nirupama Yechoor; Sheri L Towe; Kevin R Robertson; Daniel Westreich; Noeline Nakasujja; Christina S Meade Journal: J Neurovirol Date: 2016-05-31 Impact factor: 2.643
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: Rothanthi Daglas; Kelly Allott; Murat Yücel; Lisa P Henry; Craig A Macneil; Melissa K Hasty; Michael Berk; Sue M Cotton Journal: Int J Bipolar Disord Date: 2017-12-18
Authors: Alain K Koyama; Kaitlin A Hagan; Olivia I Okereke; Marc G Weisskopf; Bernard Rosner; Francine Grodstein Journal: Neuroepidemiology Date: 2015-10-27 Impact factor: 3.282