Development of the Diagnostic Matrix of the Seoul Cognitive Status Test, Compared to Traditional Paper-and-Pencil Neuropsychological Tests.

Dementia and neurocognitive disorders Pub Date : 2024-10-01 Epub Date: 2024-10-23 DOI:10.12779/dnd.2024.23.4.224
Seunghee Na, Young Ju Kim, Si Eun Kim, Na-Yeon Jung, Seung Joo Kim, Hee Jin Kim, Joon Soo Shin, Duk L Na, Sang Won Seo, Yeshin Kim, Eek-Sung Lee
{"title":"Development of the Diagnostic Matrix of the Seoul Cognitive Status Test, Compared to Traditional Paper-and-Pencil Neuropsychological Tests.","authors":"Seunghee Na, Young Ju Kim, Si Eun Kim, Na-Yeon Jung, Seung Joo Kim, Hee Jin Kim, Joon Soo Shin, Duk L Na, Sang Won Seo, Yeshin Kim, Eek-Sung Lee","doi":"10.12779/dnd.2024.23.4.224","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background and purpose: </strong>We aimed to develop the diagnostic matrix of the Seoul Cognitive Status Test (SCST) and compare its performance with traditional paper-and-pencil neuropsychological tests, including the Seoul Neuropsychological Screening Battery-II (SNSB-II) and the Korean version of the Consortium to Establish a Registry for Alzheimer's Disease (CERAD-K).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We recruited 197 participants from the head-to-head SCST-SNSB cohort, and 204 participants from the head-to-head SCST-CERAD cohort. They underwent either SNSB-II or CERAD-K, in addition to SCST. The diagnostic matrix was developed by combining cognitive function, determined by neuropsychological tests, and activities of daily living (ADL), determined by Instrumental-ADL scales.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The diagnostic agreement between the SCST and the SNSB-II was 83.9% (weighted kappa=0.87). The agreement between the SCST and the CERAD-K was 84.3% (weighted kappa=0.88). In the SCST-SNSB cohort, all differences in SCST scores between the cognitively unimpaired (CU), mild cognitive impairment (MCI), and dementia diagnosed with the SNSB-II were significant in all cognitive domains (all <i>p</i><0.01), except for the executive domain between CU and MCI (<i>p</i>=0.145). In the SCST-CERAD cohort, all differences in SCST scores between the 3 groups diagnosed with the CERAD-K were significant in all cognitive domains (all <i>p</i><0.01), except for the language and visuospatial domains between MCI and dementia (<i>p</i>=0.169 and <i>p</i>=0.778, respectively).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Our findings suggest that the tablet-based SCST may be another option to traditional paper-and-pencil neuropsychological tests, especially in situations where time and space are relatively limited, and neuropsychological testing specialists are not available.</p>","PeriodicalId":72779,"journal":{"name":"Dementia and neurocognitive disorders","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11538856/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Dementia and neurocognitive disorders","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.12779/dnd.2024.23.4.224","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/10/23 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background and purpose: We aimed to develop the diagnostic matrix of the Seoul Cognitive Status Test (SCST) and compare its performance with traditional paper-and-pencil neuropsychological tests, including the Seoul Neuropsychological Screening Battery-II (SNSB-II) and the Korean version of the Consortium to Establish a Registry for Alzheimer's Disease (CERAD-K).

Methods: We recruited 197 participants from the head-to-head SCST-SNSB cohort, and 204 participants from the head-to-head SCST-CERAD cohort. They underwent either SNSB-II or CERAD-K, in addition to SCST. The diagnostic matrix was developed by combining cognitive function, determined by neuropsychological tests, and activities of daily living (ADL), determined by Instrumental-ADL scales.

Results: The diagnostic agreement between the SCST and the SNSB-II was 83.9% (weighted kappa=0.87). The agreement between the SCST and the CERAD-K was 84.3% (weighted kappa=0.88). In the SCST-SNSB cohort, all differences in SCST scores between the cognitively unimpaired (CU), mild cognitive impairment (MCI), and dementia diagnosed with the SNSB-II were significant in all cognitive domains (all p<0.01), except for the executive domain between CU and MCI (p=0.145). In the SCST-CERAD cohort, all differences in SCST scores between the 3 groups diagnosed with the CERAD-K were significant in all cognitive domains (all p<0.01), except for the language and visuospatial domains between MCI and dementia (p=0.169 and p=0.778, respectively).

Conclusions: Our findings suggest that the tablet-based SCST may be another option to traditional paper-and-pencil neuropsychological tests, especially in situations where time and space are relatively limited, and neuropsychological testing specialists are not available.

首尔认知状况测试诊断矩阵的开发,与传统纸笔神经心理学测试的比较。
背景和目的:我们旨在开发首尔认知状态测试(SCST)的诊断矩阵,并将其与传统的纸笔神经心理测试(包括首尔神经心理筛查电池-II(SNSB-II)和韩国版阿尔茨海默病登记联盟(CERAD-K))进行比较:我们从头对头 SCST-SNSB 队列中招募了 197 名参与者,从头对头 SCST-CERAD 队列中招募了 204 名参与者。除 SCST 外,他们还接受了 SNSB-II 或 CERAD-K 检查。诊断矩阵由神经心理测试确定的认知功能和工具-ADL量表确定的日常生活活动(ADL)结合而成:SCST 和 SNSB-II 的诊断一致性为 83.9%(加权卡帕=0.87)。SCST和CERAD-K之间的一致性为84.3%(加权卡帕=0.88)。在SCST-SNSB队列中,认知功能未受损者(CU)、轻度认知功能受损者(MCI)和使用SNSB-II诊断的痴呆者之间的SCST评分在所有认知领域的差异均显著(所有pp=0.145)。在SCST-CERAD队列中,使用CERAD-K诊断的3个组别之间的SCST得分差异在所有认知领域均有显著性(所有pp分别=0.169和p=0.778):我们的研究结果表明,基于平板电脑的 SCST 可能是传统纸笔神经心理测试的另一种选择,尤其是在时间和空间相对有限且没有神经心理测试专家的情况下。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信