Tablet-Based Assessment of Picture Naming in Prodromal Alzheimer's Disease: An Accessible and Effective Tool for Distinguishing Mild Cognitive Impairment from Normal Aging.
Lauren Seidman, Sara Hyman, Rachel Kenney, Avivit Nsiri, Steven Galetta, Arjun V Masurkar, Laura Balcer
{"title":"Tablet-Based Assessment of Picture Naming in Prodromal Alzheimer's Disease: An Accessible and Effective Tool for Distinguishing Mild Cognitive Impairment from Normal Aging.","authors":"Lauren Seidman, Sara Hyman, Rachel Kenney, Avivit Nsiri, Steven Galetta, Arjun V Masurkar, Laura Balcer","doi":"10.1159/000546451","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Effective mild cognitive impairment (MCI) screening requires accessible testing. This study compared two tests for distinguishing MCI patients from controls: rapid automatized naming (RAN) for naming speed and low-contrast letter acuity (LCLA) for sensitivity to low-contrast letters.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Two RAN tasks were used: the Mobile Universal Lexicon Evaluation System (MULES, picture naming) and the Staggered Uneven Number test (SUN, number naming). Both RAN tasks were administered on a tablet and in a paper/pencil format. The tablet format was administered using the Mobile Integrated Cognitive Kit application. LCLA was tested at 2.5% and 1.25% contrast.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Sixty-four participants (31 MCI, 34 controls; mean age 73.2 ± 6.8 years) were included. MCI patients were slower than controls for paper/pencil (75.0 vs. 53.6 s, p < 0.001), and tablet MULES (69.0 s vs. 50.2 s, p = 0.01). The paper/pencil SUN showed no significant difference (MCI: 59.5 s vs. controls: 59.9 s, p = 0.07) nor did the tablet SUN (MCI: 59.3 s vs. controls: 55.7 s, p = 0.36). MCI patients had worse performance on LCLA testing at 2.5% contrast (33 letters vs. 36, p = 0.04*) and 1.25% (0 letters vs. 14 letters, p < 0.001). Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis showed similar performance of paper/pencil and tablet MULES in distinguishing MCI from controls (area under the ROC curve [AUC] = 0.77), outperforming both SUN (AUC = 0.63 paper, 0.59 tablet) and LCLA (2.5% contrast: AUC = 0.65, 1.25% contrast: AUC = 0.72).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The MULES, in both formats, may be a valuable screening tool for MCI.</p>","PeriodicalId":11126,"journal":{"name":"Dementia and Geriatric Cognitive Disorders","volume":" ","pages":"1-12"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12240569/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Dementia and Geriatric Cognitive Disorders","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1159/000546451","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Introduction: Effective mild cognitive impairment (MCI) screening requires accessible testing. This study compared two tests for distinguishing MCI patients from controls: rapid automatized naming (RAN) for naming speed and low-contrast letter acuity (LCLA) for sensitivity to low-contrast letters.
Methods: Two RAN tasks were used: the Mobile Universal Lexicon Evaluation System (MULES, picture naming) and the Staggered Uneven Number test (SUN, number naming). Both RAN tasks were administered on a tablet and in a paper/pencil format. The tablet format was administered using the Mobile Integrated Cognitive Kit application. LCLA was tested at 2.5% and 1.25% contrast.
Results: Sixty-four participants (31 MCI, 34 controls; mean age 73.2 ± 6.8 years) were included. MCI patients were slower than controls for paper/pencil (75.0 vs. 53.6 s, p < 0.001), and tablet MULES (69.0 s vs. 50.2 s, p = 0.01). The paper/pencil SUN showed no significant difference (MCI: 59.5 s vs. controls: 59.9 s, p = 0.07) nor did the tablet SUN (MCI: 59.3 s vs. controls: 55.7 s, p = 0.36). MCI patients had worse performance on LCLA testing at 2.5% contrast (33 letters vs. 36, p = 0.04*) and 1.25% (0 letters vs. 14 letters, p < 0.001). Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis showed similar performance of paper/pencil and tablet MULES in distinguishing MCI from controls (area under the ROC curve [AUC] = 0.77), outperforming both SUN (AUC = 0.63 paper, 0.59 tablet) and LCLA (2.5% contrast: AUC = 0.65, 1.25% contrast: AUC = 0.72).
Conclusion: The MULES, in both formats, may be a valuable screening tool for MCI.
期刊介绍:
As a unique forum devoted exclusively to the study of cognitive dysfunction, ''Dementia and Geriatric Cognitive Disorders'' concentrates on Alzheimer’s and Parkinson’s disease, Huntington’s chorea and other neurodegenerative diseases. The journal draws from diverse related research disciplines such as psychogeriatrics, neuropsychology, clinical neurology, morphology, physiology, genetic molecular biology, pathology, biochemistry, immunology, pharmacology and pharmaceutics. Strong emphasis is placed on the publication of research findings from animal studies which are complemented by clinical and therapeutic experience to give an overall appreciation of the field.