-
Views
-
Cite
Cite
Ivins B, Arrieux J, Cole W, Schwab K, A-231 Using Rates of Low Scores to Assess Agreement between CogState and a Traditional Battery of Neuropsychological Tests, Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology, Volume 35, Issue 6, September 2020, Page 1026, https://doi.org/10.1093/arclin/acaa068.231
Close - Share Icon Share
Abstract
CogState is a brief computerized test battery used to assess cognitive function. We compare intra-individual agreement between CogState and a battery of traditional neuropsychological tests using rates of low scores.
Complete and valid data from 246 healthy soldiers and 177 soldiers ≤ 7 days from sustaining mild TBI (mTBI) were used in this analysis. All soldiers were consecutively administered CogState and a traditional test battery consisting of: TOPF, WAIS-IV, CVLT-II, RCFT, DKEFS, and CPT-II. We performed base rate analyses of both batteries to determine the proportions of soldiers who had various numbers of scores that were 1.0+, 1.5+, and 2.0+ standard deviations below the normative mean. We used those rates to place Soldiers into a “low score hierarchy” ranging from the least poor (i.e. ~ > 10th %ile) to the worst overall performance (i.e. ~ ≤ 10th %ile). We then compared agreement between the batteries at each of those levels.
More soldiers with mTBI had low scores than healthy soldiers on both batteries. Of the soldiers who performed at the worst level on one battery, 95.1% from CogState and 70.6% from traditional had some level of poor performance on the other battery. However, of the soldiers who performed at the worst level on either battery, only 31.7% from CogState and 38.2% from traditional also performed at the worst level on the other battery.
These batteries similarly identify poor performance to a degree, though with some potentially meaningful differences still present.
