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.

Validity and reliability of a computerized cognitive function evaluation battery (CogEvo) as a screening tool.

Aim: The aim of this study was to determine the validity and reliability of cognitive function evaluation battery, CogEvo, a recently developed computerized cognitive function evaluation battery, as a screening tool for decreased cognitive function. Methods: The study sample comprised 123 (age: 57-97 years) community-dwelling elderly people. They were required to perform five CogEvo tasks and complete two questions-based neuropsychological tests, including the Mini-Mental State Examination, so that the correlations could be analyzed. The validity and reliability of CogEvo were examined using factor analysis, MacDonald's omega reliability coefficient, logistic regression analysis, and receiver operating characteristic curve analysis. Results: Exploratory factor analysis revealed the orientation/spatial cognitive function (orientation and spatial cognition) and attention/executive function (attention, memory, and execution) factors. Structural validity was supported by confirmatory factor analysis. All two-factor-based subtasks showed adequate internal consistency (MacDonald's omega ≥0.6). The total CogEvo score and two-factor scores were significantly correlated with neuropsychological test results. Based on the total CogEvo score, the cognitively normal and cognitive decline groups were identified by receiver operating characteristic curve analysis with a moderate predictive performance. The cognitive decline group was well identified using the orientation/spatial cognitive function factor. Conclusions: CogEvo is a valid and reliable screening tool for cognitive function evaluation. It proved useful in the early identification of cognitive decline in our study sample.