Psychometric Properties of Computerized Cognitive Tools and Standard Neuropsychological Tests Used to Assess Sport Concussion: A Systematic Review.

IF 5.4 2区心理学 Q1 NEUROSCIENCES

Neuropsychology Review Pub Date : 2023-12-01 Epub Date: 2022-08-30 DOI:10.1007/s11065-022-09553-4

Kristin Wilmoth, Benjamin L Brett, Natalie A Emmert, Carolyn M Cook, Jeffrey Schaffert, Todd Caze, Thomas Kotsonis, Margaret Cusick, Gary Solomon, Jacob E Resch, C Munro Cullum, Lindsay D Nelson, Michael McCrea

{"title":"Psychometric Properties of Computerized Cognitive Tools and Standard Neuropsychological Tests Used to Assess Sport Concussion: A Systematic Review.","authors":"Kristin Wilmoth, Benjamin L Brett, Natalie A Emmert, Carolyn M Cook, Jeffrey Schaffert, Todd Caze, Thomas Kotsonis, Margaret Cusick, Gary Solomon, Jacob E Resch, C Munro Cullum, Lindsay D Nelson, Michael McCrea","doi":"10.1007/s11065-022-09553-4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Athletic programs are more frequently turning to computerized cognitive tools in order to increase efficiencies in concussion assessment. However, assessment using a traditional neuropsychological test battery may provide a more comprehensive and individualized evaluation. Our goal was to inform sport clinicians of the best practices for concussion assessment through a systematic literature review describing the psychometric properties of standard neuropsychological tests and computerized tools. We conducted our search in relevant databases including Ovid Medline, Web of Science, PsycINFO, and Scopus. Journal articles were included if they evaluated psychometric properties (e.g., reliability, sensitivity) of a cognitive assessment within pure athlete samples (up to 30 days post-injury). Searches yielded 4,758 unique results. Ultimately, 103 articles met inclusion criteria, all of which focused on adolescent or young adult participants. Test-retest reliability estimates ranged from .14 to .93 for computerized tools and .02 to .95 for standard neuropsychological tests, with strongest correlations on processing speed tasks for both modalities, although processing speed tasks were most susceptible to practice effects. Reliability was improved with a 2-factor model (processing speed and memory) and by aggregating multiple baseline exams, yet remained below acceptable limits for some studies. Sensitivity to decreased cognitive performance within 72 h of injury ranged from 45%-93% for computerized tools and 18%-80% for standard neuropsychological test batteries. The method for classifying cognitive decline (normative comparison, reliable change indices, regression-based methods) affected sensitivity estimates. Combining computerized tools and standard neuropsychological tests with the strongest psychometric performance provides the greatest value in clinical assessment. To this end, future studies should evaluate the efficacy of hybrid test batteries comprised of top-performing measures from both modalities.</p>","PeriodicalId":49754,"journal":{"name":"Neuropsychology Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":5.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Neuropsychology Review","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11065-022-09553-4","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2022/8/30 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"NEUROSCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Athletic programs are more frequently turning to computerized cognitive tools in order to increase efficiencies in concussion assessment. However, assessment using a traditional neuropsychological test battery may provide a more comprehensive and individualized evaluation. Our goal was to inform sport clinicians of the best practices for concussion assessment through a systematic literature review describing the psychometric properties of standard neuropsychological tests and computerized tools. We conducted our search in relevant databases including Ovid Medline, Web of Science, PsycINFO, and Scopus. Journal articles were included if they evaluated psychometric properties (e.g., reliability, sensitivity) of a cognitive assessment within pure athlete samples (up to 30 days post-injury). Searches yielded 4,758 unique results. Ultimately, 103 articles met inclusion criteria, all of which focused on adolescent or young adult participants. Test-retest reliability estimates ranged from .14 to .93 for computerized tools and .02 to .95 for standard neuropsychological tests, with strongest correlations on processing speed tasks for both modalities, although processing speed tasks were most susceptible to practice effects. Reliability was improved with a 2-factor model (processing speed and memory) and by aggregating multiple baseline exams, yet remained below acceptable limits for some studies. Sensitivity to decreased cognitive performance within 72 h of injury ranged from 45%-93% for computerized tools and 18%-80% for standard neuropsychological test batteries. The method for classifying cognitive decline (normative comparison, reliable change indices, regression-based methods) affected sensitivity estimates. Combining computerized tools and standard neuropsychological tests with the strongest psychometric performance provides the greatest value in clinical assessment. To this end, future studies should evaluate the efficacy of hybrid test batteries comprised of top-performing measures from both modalities.

查看原文本刊更多论文

用于评估运动性脑震荡的计算机化认知工具和标准神经心理学测试的心理计量特性：系统回顾

为了提高脑震荡评估的效率，运动项目越来越多地采用计算机化的认知工具。然而，使用传统的神经心理测试套件进行评估可能会提供更全面、更个性化的评估。我们的目标是通过对标准神经心理学测试和计算机化工具的心理测量特性进行系统的文献综述，让体育临床医生了解脑震荡评估的最佳实践。我们在相关数据库中进行了检索，包括 Ovid Medline、Web of Science、PsycINFO 和 Scopus。如果期刊文章评估了纯运动员样本（受伤后 30 天内）认知评估的心理测量特性（如可靠性、灵敏度），则会被收录。搜索结果共有 4,758 条。最终，103 篇文章符合纳入标准，所有文章均以青少年或年轻成人参与者为研究对象。计算机化工具的重测可靠性估计值为 0.14 至 0.93，标准神经心理学测试的重测可靠性估计值为 0.02 至 0.95，两种模式的处理速度任务相关性最强，但处理速度任务最容易受到练习效应的影响。采用双因素模型（处理速度和记忆）和综合多项基线测试提高了信度，但有些研究的信度仍低于可接受的限度。计算机化工具对受伤后 72 小时内认知能力下降的敏感度在 45%-93% 之间，标准神经心理测试的敏感度在 18%-80% 之间。对认知能力下降进行分类的方法（常模比较法、可靠变化指数法、回归法）会影响灵敏度估计值。将心理测量性能最强的计算机化工具和标准神经心理学测试结合起来，可为临床评估提供最大价值。为此，未来的研究应评估由两种模式中表现最佳的测量方法组成的混合测试组合的功效。

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

Neuropsychology Review 医学-神经科学

CiteScore

11.00

自引率

1.70%

发文量

期刊介绍： Neuropsychology Review is a quarterly, refereed publication devoted to integrative review papers on substantive content areas in neuropsychology, with particular focus on populations with endogenous or acquired conditions affecting brain and function and on translational research providing a mechanistic understanding of clinical problems. Publication of new data is not the purview of the journal. Articles are written by international specialists in the field, discussing such complex issues as distinctive functional features of central nervous system disease and injury; challenges in early diagnosis; the impact of genes and environment on function; risk factors for functional impairment; treatment efficacy of neuropsychological rehabilitation; the role of neuroimaging, neuroelectrophysiology, and other neurometric modalities in explicating function; clinical trial design; neuropsychological function and its substrates characteristic of normal development and aging; and neuropsychological dysfunction and its substrates in neurological, psychiatric, and medical conditions. The journal''s broad perspective is supported by an outstanding, multidisciplinary editorial review board guided by the aim to provide students and professionals, clinicians and researchers with scholarly articles that critically and objectively summarize and synthesize the strengths and weaknesses in the literature and propose novel hypotheses, methods of analysis, and links to other fields.