Validation of a Mobile, Sensor-based Neurobehavioral Assessment With Digital Signal Processing and Machine-learning Analytics.

IF 1.3 4区 医学 Q4 BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES
Kelly L Sloane, Joel A Mefford, Zilong Zhao, Man Xu, Guifeng Zhou, Rachel Fabian, Amy E Wright, Shenly Glenn
{"title":"Validation of a Mobile, Sensor-based Neurobehavioral Assessment With Digital Signal Processing and Machine-learning Analytics.","authors":"Kelly L Sloane,&nbsp;Joel A Mefford,&nbsp;Zilong Zhao,&nbsp;Man Xu,&nbsp;Guifeng Zhou,&nbsp;Rachel Fabian,&nbsp;Amy E Wright,&nbsp;Shenly Glenn","doi":"10.1097/WNN.0000000000000308","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The Miro Health Mobile Assessment Platform consists of self-administered neurobehavioral and cognitive assessments that measure behaviors typically measured by specialized clinicians.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To evaluate the Miro Health Mobile Assessment Platform's concurrent validity, test-retest reliability, and mild cognitive impairment (MCI) classification performance.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>Sixty study participants were evaluated with Miro Health version V.2. Healthy controls (HC), amnestic MCI (aMCI), and nonamnestic MCI (naMCI) ages 64-85 were evaluated with version V.3. Additional participants were recruited at Johns Hopkins Hospital to represent clinic patients, with wider ranges of age and diagnosis. In all, 90 HC, 21 aMCI, 17 naMCI, and 15 other cases were evaluated with V.3. Concurrent validity of the Miro Health variables and legacy neuropsychological test scores was assessed with Spearman correlations. Reliability was quantified with the scores' intraclass correlations. A machine-learning algorithm combined Miro Health variable scores into a Risk score to differentiate HC from MCI or MCI subtypes.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In HC, correlations of Miro Health variables with legacy test scores ranged 0.27-0.68. Test-retest reliabilities ranged 0.25-0.79, with minimal learning effects. The Risk score differentiated individuals with aMCI from HC with an area under the receiver operator curve (AUROC) of 0.97; naMCI from HC with an AUROC of 0.80; combined MCI from HC with an AUROC of 0.89; and aMCI from naMCI with an AUROC of 0.83.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The Miro Health Mobile Assessment Platform provides valid and reliable assessment of neurobehavioral and cognitive status, effectively distinguishes between HC and MCI, and differentiates aMCI from naMCI.</p>","PeriodicalId":50671,"journal":{"name":"Cognitive and Behavioral Neurology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2022-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cognitive and Behavioral Neurology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/WNN.0000000000000308","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Background: The Miro Health Mobile Assessment Platform consists of self-administered neurobehavioral and cognitive assessments that measure behaviors typically measured by specialized clinicians.

Objective: To evaluate the Miro Health Mobile Assessment Platform's concurrent validity, test-retest reliability, and mild cognitive impairment (MCI) classification performance.

Method: Sixty study participants were evaluated with Miro Health version V.2. Healthy controls (HC), amnestic MCI (aMCI), and nonamnestic MCI (naMCI) ages 64-85 were evaluated with version V.3. Additional participants were recruited at Johns Hopkins Hospital to represent clinic patients, with wider ranges of age and diagnosis. In all, 90 HC, 21 aMCI, 17 naMCI, and 15 other cases were evaluated with V.3. Concurrent validity of the Miro Health variables and legacy neuropsychological test scores was assessed with Spearman correlations. Reliability was quantified with the scores' intraclass correlations. A machine-learning algorithm combined Miro Health variable scores into a Risk score to differentiate HC from MCI or MCI subtypes.

Results: In HC, correlations of Miro Health variables with legacy test scores ranged 0.27-0.68. Test-retest reliabilities ranged 0.25-0.79, with minimal learning effects. The Risk score differentiated individuals with aMCI from HC with an area under the receiver operator curve (AUROC) of 0.97; naMCI from HC with an AUROC of 0.80; combined MCI from HC with an AUROC of 0.89; and aMCI from naMCI with an AUROC of 0.83.

Conclusion: The Miro Health Mobile Assessment Platform provides valid and reliable assessment of neurobehavioral and cognitive status, effectively distinguishes between HC and MCI, and differentiates aMCI from naMCI.

通过数字信号处理和机器学习分析验证基于传感器的移动神经行为评估。
背景:Miro Health移动评估平台由自我管理的神经行为和认知评估组成,这些评估通常由专业临床医生测量。目的:评估Miro Health移动评估平台的并发有效性、重测可靠性和轻度认知障碍(MCI)分类性能。方法:60名研究参与者使用Miro Health版本V.2进行评估。健康对照组(HC)、健忘症MCI(aMCI)和非健忘症MCAI(naMCI),年龄64-85岁,用V.3版进行评估。约翰斯·霍普金斯医院招募了更多的参与者来代表年龄和诊断范围更广的临床患者。总共有90例HC、21例aMCI、17例naMCI和15例其他病例用V.3进行了评估。Miro健康变量和遗留神经心理测试分数的同时有效性采用Spearman相关性进行评估。可靠性通过评分的组内相关性进行量化。一种机器学习算法将Miro Health变量得分合并为风险得分,以区分HC与MCI或MCI亚型。结果:在HC中,Miro Health变量与传统测试分数的相关性范围为0.27-0.68。测试-再测试的信度在0.25-0.79之间,学习效果最小。风险评分将aMCI患者与HC患者区分开来,受试者-操作者曲线下面积(AUROC)为0.97;来自AUROC为0.80的HC的naMCI;来自HC的组合MCI具有0.89的AUROC;和aMCI与naMCI的AUROC为0.83。结论:Miro Health移动评估平台提供了有效可靠的神经行为和认知状态评估,有效区分了HC和MCI,并区分了aMCI和naMCI。
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
CiteScore
2.40
自引率
7.10%
发文量
68
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Cognitive and Behavioral Neurology (CBN) is a forum for advances in the neurologic understanding and possible treatment of human disorders that affect thinking, learning, memory, communication, and behavior. As an incubator for innovations in these fields, CBN helps transform theory into practice. The journal serves clinical research, patient care, education, and professional advancement. The journal welcomes contributions from neurology, cognitive neuroscience, neuropsychology, neuropsychiatry, and other relevant fields. The editors particularly encourage review articles (including reviews of clinical practice), experimental and observational case reports, instructional articles for interested students and professionals in other fields, and innovative articles that do not fit neatly into any category. Also welcome are therapeutic trials and other experimental and observational studies, brief reports, first-person accounts of neurologic experiences, position papers, hypotheses, opinion papers, commentaries, historical perspectives, and book reviews.
×
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