Validity, reliability, and psychometric properties of a computerized, cognitive assessment test (Cognivue®)
Diego Cahn-Hidalgo1, Paul W Estes2, Reina Benabou3
1Internal Medicine of Brighton, Rochester, NY 14623, United States.
Background:
Cognitive issues such as Alzheimer's disease and other dementias confer a substantial negative impact. Problems relating to sensitivity, subjectivity, and inherent bias can limit the usefulness of many traditional methods of assessing cognitive impairment.
Aim:
To determine cut-off scores for classification of cognitive impairment, and assess Cognivue® safety and efficacy in a large validation study.
Methods:
Adults (age 55-95 years) at risk for age-related cognitive decline or dementia were invited via posters and email to participate in two cohort studies conducted at various outpatient clinics and assisted- and independent-living facilities. In the cut-off score determination study (n = 92), optimization analyses by positive percent agreement (PPA) and negative percent agreement (NPA), and by accuracy and error bias were conducted. In the clinical validation study (n = 401), regression, rank linear regression, and factor analyses were conducted. Participants in the clinical validation study also completed other neuropsychological tests.
Results:
For the cut-off score determination study, 92 participants completed St. Louis University Mental Status (SLUMS, reference standard) and Cognivue® tests. Analyses showed that SLUMS cut-off scores of < 21 (impairment) and > 26 (no impairment) corresponded to Cognivue® scores of 54.5 (NPA = 0.92; PPA = 0.64) and 78.5 (NPA = 0.5; PPA = 0.79), respectively. Therefore, conservatively, Cognivue® scores of 55-64 corresponded to impairment, and 74-79 to no impairment. For the clinical validation study, 401 participants completed ≥ 1 testing session, and 358 completed 2 sessions 1-2 wk apart. Cognivue® classification scores were validated, demonstrating good agreement with SLUMS scores (weighted κ 0.57; 95%CI: 0.50-0.63). Reliability analyses showed similar scores across repeated testing for Cognivue® (R 2 = 0.81; r = 0.90) and SLUMS (R 2 = 0.67; r = 0.82). Psychometric validity of Cognivue® was demonstrated vs. traditional neuropsychological tests. Scores were most closely correlated with measures of verbal processing, manual dexterity/speed, visual contrast sensitivity, visuospatial/executive function, and speed/sequencing.
Conclusion:
Cognivue® scores ≤ 50 avoid misclassification of impairment, and scores ≥ 75 avoid misclassification of unimpairment. The validation study demonstrates good agreement between Cognivue® and SLUMS; superior reliability; and good psychometric validity.
Related Concept Videos
Reliability and Validity
Introduction to Cognitive Psychology
This field emerged in the mid-20th century, following a period dominated by behaviorism, which...
Cognitivism
Previously dominated by behaviorism, which prioritized observable behaviors and largely ignored mental processes, psychology transformed in the 1950s. Cognitive psychologists argue that understanding how we think and process...
Cattell's Theory of Intelligence
Fluid intelligence involves the capacity to solve new problems and adapt to unfamiliar situations. It's the type of intelligence individuals use when they encounter a novel problem or puzzle that requires innovative thinking. For instance, figuring out how to operate a new gadget relies heavily on...
Self-Report Tests of Personality
Measures of Intelligence
Validity refers to how well a test measures what it claims to measure. An intelligence test should accurately assess intelligence rather than another characteristic, like anxiety. Criterion validity is one way to evaluate this;...


