Laura Klaming, Mandy Spaltman, Stefan Vermeent, Gijs van Elswijk, Justin B Miller, Ben Schmand
{"title":"Test-retest reliability and reliable change index of the Philips IntelliSpace Cognition digital test battery.","authors":"Laura Klaming, Mandy Spaltman, Stefan Vermeent, Gijs van Elswijk, Justin B Miller, Ben Schmand","doi":"10.1080/13854046.2024.2315747","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>This article provides the test-retest reliability and Reliable Change Indices (RCIs) of the Philips IntelliSpace Cognition (ISC) platform, which contains digitized versions of well-established neuropsychological tests.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>147 participants (ages 19 to 88) completed a digital cognitive test battery on the ISC platform or paper-pencil versions of the same test battery during two separate visits. Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) were calculated separately for the ISC and analog test versions to compare reliabilities between administration modalities. RCIs were calculated for the digital tests using the practice-adjusted RCI and standardized regression-based (SRB) method.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Test-retest reliabilities for the ISC tests ranged from moderate to excellent and were comparable to the test-retest reliabilities for the paper-pencil tests. Baseline test performance, retest interval, age, and education predicted test performance at visit 2 with baseline test performance being the strongest predictor for all outcome measures. For most outcome measures, both methods for the calculation of RCIs show agreement on whether or not a reliable change was observed.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>RCIs for the digital tests enable clinicians to determine whether a measured change between assessments is due to real improvement or decline. Together, this contributes to the growing evidence for the clinical utility of the ISC platform.</p>","PeriodicalId":55250,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Neuropsychologist","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical Neuropsychologist","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13854046.2024.2315747","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/2/15 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Objective: This article provides the test-retest reliability and Reliable Change Indices (RCIs) of the Philips IntelliSpace Cognition (ISC) platform, which contains digitized versions of well-established neuropsychological tests.
Method: 147 participants (ages 19 to 88) completed a digital cognitive test battery on the ISC platform or paper-pencil versions of the same test battery during two separate visits. Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) were calculated separately for the ISC and analog test versions to compare reliabilities between administration modalities. RCIs were calculated for the digital tests using the practice-adjusted RCI and standardized regression-based (SRB) method.
Results: Test-retest reliabilities for the ISC tests ranged from moderate to excellent and were comparable to the test-retest reliabilities for the paper-pencil tests. Baseline test performance, retest interval, age, and education predicted test performance at visit 2 with baseline test performance being the strongest predictor for all outcome measures. For most outcome measures, both methods for the calculation of RCIs show agreement on whether or not a reliable change was observed.
Conclusions: RCIs for the digital tests enable clinicians to determine whether a measured change between assessments is due to real improvement or decline. Together, this contributes to the growing evidence for the clinical utility of the ISC platform.
期刊介绍:
The Clinical Neuropsychologist (TCN) serves as the premier forum for (1) state-of-the-art clinically-relevant scientific research, (2) in-depth professional discussions of matters germane to evidence-based practice, and (3) clinical case studies in neuropsychology. Of particular interest are papers that can make definitive statements about a given topic (thereby having implications for the standards of clinical practice) and those with the potential to expand today’s clinical frontiers. Research on all age groups, and on both clinical and normal populations, is considered.