| Literature DB >> 30042093 |
Nicholas Bott1,2, Erica N Madero2, Jordan Glenn2, Alexander Lange2, John Anderson2, Doug Newton2, Adam Brennan2, Elizabeth A Buffalo2,3, Dorene Rentz4,5, Stuart Zola2,6.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: As eye tracking-based assessment of cognition becomes more widely used in older adults, particularly those at risk for dementia, reliable and scalable methods to collect high-quality data are required. Eye tracking-based cognitive tests that utilize device-embedded cameras have the potential to reach large numbers of people as a screening tool for preclinical cognitive decline. However, to fully validate this approach, more empirical evidence about the comparability of eyetracking-based paradigms to existing cognitive batteries is needed.Entities:
Keywords: eye tracking; neuropsychological testing; preclinical Alzheimer’s disease; visual paired comparison
Mesh:
Year: 2018 PMID: 30042093 PMCID: PMC6081607 DOI: 10.2196/11143
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Med Internet Res ISSN: 1438-8871 Impact factor: 5.428
Characteristics of the study cohort of cognitively normal older adults.
| Characteristic | Value (N=49) | ||
| Age (years), mean (SD) | 69 (8) | ||
| Female | 28 (57) | ||
| Male | 21 (43) | ||
| Years of education, mean (SD) | 16 (3) | ||
| European-American | 31 (63) | ||
| African American | 18 (37) | ||
Correlations between visual paired comparison task performance by camera type and cognitive assessments.
| Cognitive assessment | Tobii X2-60 | Laptop-embedded Camera | Fisher r to z transformation ( | ||
| PACCd Composite | .43 | .005b | .39 | .007b | .42 |
| MMSEe | .20 | .21 | .13 | .40 | .37 |
| LM-DRf | .30 | .06 | .25 | .09 | .16 |
| FCSRTg | –.05 | .75 | .22 | .15 | .11 |
| Digit Symbol Coding | .48 | .001b | .32 | .03c | .18 |
| Letter Fluency | .44 | .004b | .33 | .02c | .28 |
| Category Fluency | .43 | .005b | .36 | .01c | .36 |
| Trails A | –.45 | .003b | –.40 | .006b | .39 |
| NIHTB-CBh Composite | .32 | .049c | .35 | .03c | .40 |
| PVTi | .28 | .09 | .28 | .07 | .50 |
| PSMTj | .39 | .01c | .33 | .03c | .38 |
| Flanker | –.006 | .97 | .22 | .16 | .16 |
| DCCSk | .29 | .07 | .37 | .02c | .35 |
aDetermined by Spearman correlations and two-tailed Fisher r to z correlation comparisons.
bP<.01.
cP<.05.
dPACC: : Preclinical Alzheimer’s Cognitive Composite.
eMMSE: Mini-Mental State Exam.
fLM-DR: Logical Memory-delayed recall.
gFCSRT: Free and Cued Selective Reminding Test.
hNIHTB-CB: National Institute of Health Toolbox Cognitive Battery.
iPVT: Picture Vocabulary Test.
jPSMT: Picture Sequence Memory Test.
kDCCS: Dimensional Change Card Sort.
Figure 1Relationship between overall mean novelty preference scores collected by the Tobii commercial-grade eye tracker and device-embedded web camera.
Figure 2Relationship between trial-level novelty preference scores collected by the Tobii commercial-grade eye tracker and device-embedded web camera.