{"title":"自动神经心理评估指标 UltraMobile 的反应时间测量精度。","authors":"Jacques Arrieux,Brian Ivins","doi":"10.1093/arclin/acae070","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"OBJECTIVE\r\nThis observational study examined the accuracy of simple reaction time (RT) measurements on various touchscreen tablet devices using the Automated Neuropsychological Assessment Metric (ANAM) UltraMobile test battery. The study investigated the implications of interpreting ANAM UltraMobile with laptop-based normative data by analyzing the magnitude and variability of RT accuracy across devices.\r\n\r\nMETHOD\r\nRT accuracy on 10 different tablets was assessed using a photodetector and robotic arm to respond to stimuli at predetermined response times. The recorded RT was compared with the true RT obtained from the robotic arm to calculate the RT error.\r\n\r\nRESULTS\r\nANAM UltraMobile recorded slower RTs than the laptop version. Additionally, RT error varied considerably among the 10 tablet models, suggesting psychometrically significant implications that could lead to interpretive errors when using laptop-based normative data.\r\n\r\nCONCLUSIONS\r\nRelative to the RT error from the laptop-based version of ANAM, tablet data from ANAM UltraMobile are significantly slower and exhibit large variability between devices. These differences may have clinically significant implications for the comparability of the two versions. The findings suggest that further research with human participants is needed to assess the equivalence of ANAM UltraMobile with its predecessor.","PeriodicalId":2,"journal":{"name":"ACS Applied Bio Materials","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Accuracy of Reaction Time Measurement on Automated Neuropsychological Assessment Metric UltraMobile.\",\"authors\":\"Jacques Arrieux,Brian Ivins\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/arclin/acae070\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"OBJECTIVE\\r\\nThis observational study examined the accuracy of simple reaction time (RT) measurements on various touchscreen tablet devices using the Automated Neuropsychological Assessment Metric (ANAM) UltraMobile test battery. The study investigated the implications of interpreting ANAM UltraMobile with laptop-based normative data by analyzing the magnitude and variability of RT accuracy across devices.\\r\\n\\r\\nMETHOD\\r\\nRT accuracy on 10 different tablets was assessed using a photodetector and robotic arm to respond to stimuli at predetermined response times. The recorded RT was compared with the true RT obtained from the robotic arm to calculate the RT error.\\r\\n\\r\\nRESULTS\\r\\nANAM UltraMobile recorded slower RTs than the laptop version. Additionally, RT error varied considerably among the 10 tablet models, suggesting psychometrically significant implications that could lead to interpretive errors when using laptop-based normative data.\\r\\n\\r\\nCONCLUSIONS\\r\\nRelative to the RT error from the laptop-based version of ANAM, tablet data from ANAM UltraMobile are significantly slower and exhibit large variability between devices. These differences may have clinically significant implications for the comparability of the two versions. The findings suggest that further research with human participants is needed to assess the equivalence of ANAM UltraMobile with its predecessor.\",\"PeriodicalId\":2,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"ACS Applied Bio Materials\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-13\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"ACS Applied Bio Materials\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/arclin/acae070\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"MATERIALS SCIENCE, BIOMATERIALS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ACS Applied Bio Materials","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/arclin/acae070","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MATERIALS SCIENCE, BIOMATERIALS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
目的:本观察性研究使用自动神经心理评估标准(ANAM)UltraMobile测试电池,对各种触摸屏平板设备上简单反应时间(RT)测量的准确性进行了研究。该研究通过分析不同设备的反应时间准确性的幅度和变异性,探讨了用基于笔记本电脑的常模数据解释 ANAM UltraMobile 的意义。方法 使用光电探测器和机械臂在预定反应时间内对刺激做出反应,评估 10 种不同平板电脑的反应时间准确性。将记录的实时反应时间与机械臂获得的真实实时反应时间进行比较,计算出实时反应时间误差。结果ANAM UltraMobile 记录的实时反应时间比笔记本电脑版慢。此外,10 种型号的平板电脑的 RT 误差差异很大,这表明在使用基于笔记本电脑的常模数据时,可能会导致解释性错误,从而产生心理测量学上的重大影响。这些差异可能会对两个版本的可比性产生重要的临床影响。研究结果表明,需要对人类参与者进行进一步研究,以评估 ANAM UltraMobile 与其前身的等效性。
Accuracy of Reaction Time Measurement on Automated Neuropsychological Assessment Metric UltraMobile.
OBJECTIVE
This observational study examined the accuracy of simple reaction time (RT) measurements on various touchscreen tablet devices using the Automated Neuropsychological Assessment Metric (ANAM) UltraMobile test battery. The study investigated the implications of interpreting ANAM UltraMobile with laptop-based normative data by analyzing the magnitude and variability of RT accuracy across devices.
METHOD
RT accuracy on 10 different tablets was assessed using a photodetector and robotic arm to respond to stimuli at predetermined response times. The recorded RT was compared with the true RT obtained from the robotic arm to calculate the RT error.
RESULTS
ANAM UltraMobile recorded slower RTs than the laptop version. Additionally, RT error varied considerably among the 10 tablet models, suggesting psychometrically significant implications that could lead to interpretive errors when using laptop-based normative data.
CONCLUSIONS
Relative to the RT error from the laptop-based version of ANAM, tablet data from ANAM UltraMobile are significantly slower and exhibit large variability between devices. These differences may have clinically significant implications for the comparability of the two versions. The findings suggest that further research with human participants is needed to assess the equivalence of ANAM UltraMobile with its predecessor.