使用 CogEvo 评估轻度认知功能障碍:计算机化认知功能评估工具

IF 3 Q1 PRIMARY HEALTH CARE
Toru Satoh, Yoichi Sawada, Hideaki Saba, Hiroshi Kitamoto, Yoshiki Kato, Yoshiko Shiozuka, Tomoko Kuwada, Sayoko Shima, Kana Murakami, Megumi Sasaki, Yudai Abe, Kaori Harano
{"title":"使用 CogEvo 评估轻度认知功能障碍:计算机化认知功能评估工具","authors":"Toru Satoh, Yoichi Sawada, Hideaki Saba, Hiroshi Kitamoto, Yoshiki Kato, Yoshiko Shiozuka, Tomoko Kuwada, Sayoko Shima, Kana Murakami, Megumi Sasaki, Yudai Abe, Kaori Harano","doi":"10.1177/21501319241239228","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction/objectives: </strong>To assess the utility of the computerized cognitive function assessment tool, CogEvo, as a screening tool for mild cognitive impairment in primary care, we explored the relationship between CogEvo performance, age, and the severity of cognitive dysfunction evaluated by the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The observational cross-sectional study included 209 individuals' data (mean age 79.4 ± 8.9 years). We conducted a correlation analysis between CogEvo and MMSE scores, compared the performance among the 3 cognitive function groups (MMSE ≥ 28 group; MMSE24-27 group; MMSE ≤ 23 group) using the MMSE cut-off, and evaluated CogEvo's predictive accuracy for cognitive dysfunction through ROC analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Both total CogEvo and MMSE scores significantly decreased with age. A significant positive correlation was observed between total CogEvo and MMSE scores, but a ceiling effect was detected in MMSE performance. Significant differences were observed in the total CogEvo score, including orientation and spatial cognitive function scores, among the 3 groups. CogEvo showed no educational bias. ROC analyses indicated moderate discrimination between the MMSE ≥ 28 group and the MMSE24-27 and MMSE ≤ 23 groups.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The computer-administered CogEvo has the advantage of not exhibiting ceiling effects or educational bias like the MMSE, and was found to be able to detect age-related cognitive decline and impairment.</p>","PeriodicalId":46723,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Primary Care and Community Health","volume":"15 ","pages":"21501319241239228"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10953101/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Assessment of Mild Cognitive Impairment Using CogEvo: A Computerized Cognitive Function Assessment Tool.\",\"authors\":\"Toru Satoh, Yoichi Sawada, Hideaki Saba, Hiroshi Kitamoto, Yoshiki Kato, Yoshiko Shiozuka, Tomoko Kuwada, Sayoko Shima, Kana Murakami, Megumi Sasaki, Yudai Abe, Kaori Harano\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/21501319241239228\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction/objectives: </strong>To assess the utility of the computerized cognitive function assessment tool, CogEvo, as a screening tool for mild cognitive impairment in primary care, we explored the relationship between CogEvo performance, age, and the severity of cognitive dysfunction evaluated by the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The observational cross-sectional study included 209 individuals' data (mean age 79.4 ± 8.9 years). We conducted a correlation analysis between CogEvo and MMSE scores, compared the performance among the 3 cognitive function groups (MMSE ≥ 28 group; MMSE24-27 group; MMSE ≤ 23 group) using the MMSE cut-off, and evaluated CogEvo's predictive accuracy for cognitive dysfunction through ROC analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Both total CogEvo and MMSE scores significantly decreased with age. A significant positive correlation was observed between total CogEvo and MMSE scores, but a ceiling effect was detected in MMSE performance. Significant differences were observed in the total CogEvo score, including orientation and spatial cognitive function scores, among the 3 groups. CogEvo showed no educational bias. ROC analyses indicated moderate discrimination between the MMSE ≥ 28 group and the MMSE24-27 and MMSE ≤ 23 groups.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The computer-administered CogEvo has the advantage of not exhibiting ceiling effects or educational bias like the MMSE, and was found to be able to detect age-related cognitive decline and impairment.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":46723,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Primary Care and Community Health\",\"volume\":\"15 \",\"pages\":\"21501319241239228\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10953101/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Primary Care and Community Health\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/21501319241239228\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PRIMARY HEALTH CARE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Primary Care and Community Health","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/21501319241239228","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PRIMARY HEALTH CARE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

简介/目的为了评估计算机化认知功能评估工具 CogEvo 作为初级保健中轻度认知功能障碍筛查工具的实用性,我们探讨了 CogEvo 性能、年龄和通过迷你精神状态检查(MMSE)评估的认知功能障碍严重程度之间的关系:观察性横断面研究包括 209 人的数据(平均年龄为 79.4 ± 8.9 岁)。我们对 CogEvo 和 MMSE 分数进行了相关性分析,使用 MMSE 临界值比较了 3 个认知功能组(MMSE ≥ 28 组;MMSE24-27 组;MMSE ≤ 23 组)的表现,并通过 ROC 分析评估了 CogEvo 对认知功能障碍的预测准确性:结果:随着年龄的增长,CogEvo和MMSE总分均明显下降。CogEvo 总分和 MMSE 分数之间存在明显的正相关,但在 MMSE 表现中发现了天花板效应。在 CogEvo 总分(包括定向和空间认知功能得分)方面,3 组之间存在明显差异。CogEvo 没有显示出教育偏差。ROC分析表明,MMSE≥28组与MMSE24-27组和MMSE≤23组之间存在中等程度的差异:结论:计算机管理的 CogEvo 具有不像 MMSE 那样表现出天花板效应或教育偏差的优点,并且能够检测出与年龄相关的认知能力下降和损伤。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Assessment of Mild Cognitive Impairment Using CogEvo: A Computerized Cognitive Function Assessment Tool.

Introduction/objectives: To assess the utility of the computerized cognitive function assessment tool, CogEvo, as a screening tool for mild cognitive impairment in primary care, we explored the relationship between CogEvo performance, age, and the severity of cognitive dysfunction evaluated by the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE).

Methods: The observational cross-sectional study included 209 individuals' data (mean age 79.4 ± 8.9 years). We conducted a correlation analysis between CogEvo and MMSE scores, compared the performance among the 3 cognitive function groups (MMSE ≥ 28 group; MMSE24-27 group; MMSE ≤ 23 group) using the MMSE cut-off, and evaluated CogEvo's predictive accuracy for cognitive dysfunction through ROC analysis.

Results: Both total CogEvo and MMSE scores significantly decreased with age. A significant positive correlation was observed between total CogEvo and MMSE scores, but a ceiling effect was detected in MMSE performance. Significant differences were observed in the total CogEvo score, including orientation and spatial cognitive function scores, among the 3 groups. CogEvo showed no educational bias. ROC analyses indicated moderate discrimination between the MMSE ≥ 28 group and the MMSE24-27 and MMSE ≤ 23 groups.

Conclusions: The computer-administered CogEvo has the advantage of not exhibiting ceiling effects or educational bias like the MMSE, and was found to be able to detect age-related cognitive decline and impairment.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.80
自引率
2.80%
发文量
183
审稿时长
15 weeks
×
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