RESUMEN
The present study aimed to establish test-retest reliability and investigate practice effects of the Mindmore cognitive assessment tool, a digital adaptation of traditional pencil and paper tests designed for self-administration. Additionally, normative change scores for the most frequently used tests were derived. A total of 149 healthy Swedish adults (aged 20-79) completed the test battery twice, 1 month apart. The battery assessed attention and processing speed, memory, language, visuospatial functions, and executive functions. Test-retest reliability, measured by ICC and Spearman coefficients, and practice effects were estimated for 22 main-scores and 33 sub-scores. Regression models were used to assess change in performance while controlling for demographics, computer equipment, testing location (online or in-laboratory) and baseline performance for 12 main-scores and nine sub-scores. Test-retest reliability was good for 11 main-scores (≥0.70), satisfactory for five (0.60-0.69), and minimal for six (<0.60) albeit three having satisfactory sub-scores. Practice effects were observed for tests with a major speed component, but not for reaction time, sustained attention, verbal memory and naming (alternate forms), nor visuospatial functions. Trackpad negatively influenced change for one test. Demographics and testing location did not significantly affect the change scores. Our study provides support for test-retest reliability and practice effects of the Mindmore cognitive assessment tool which were comparable to those of traditional tests. These findings, together with the normative change scores, can aid researchers and clinicians in interpreting test results and distinguishing between normal variations in performance and changes indicative of clinical impairment.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Patients with stress-related mental disorders often report cognitive impairment, but studies investigating objective cognitive impairment in patients with stress-related disorders have produced inconsistent findings. AIM: The primary aim of this study was to investigate objective cognitive functioning in patients diagnosed with the stress-related disorders adjustment disorder or exhaustion disorder, compared to a healthy normative group. Secondary aims were to conduct subgroup analyses of cognitive functioning between the diagnostic groups and explore associations between self-reported symptoms and cognitive functioning. METHODS: Cognitive test results on a digitally self-administered cognitive test battery from 266 patients (adjustment disorder, n = 131; exhaustion disorder, n = 135) were cross-sectionally compared with results from a healthy normative group (N = 184 to 692) using one-tailed t-tests. ANOVAs were conducted for subgroup analyses, and regression analyses for associations between self-reported symptoms and cognitive functioning. Effect sizes were calculated. RESULTS: Patients performed significantly worse than the normative group on all measures with small to moderate effect sizes ranging from d = -.13 to -.57. Those diagnosed with exhaustion disorder performed worse than norms on more measures than did patients with adjustment disorder, but no significant differences between diagnostic groups were found on any measure. Self-reported memory impairment was weakly associated with one of two memory measures. No clear associations between self-reported burnout symptoms and objective cognitive functioning were found. CONCLUSIONS: This study adds to the literature indicative of small to moderate objective cognitive impairments in patients diagnosed with stress-related mental disorders. Further exploration into mechanisms of cognitive functioning in different populations is needed for development of theoretical models that may explain the weak correlation between self-reported symptoms and objective measures. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrial.gov: NCT04797273. Trial registration date 15 March 2021. This study was also pre-registered on Open Science Framework (osf.io) with https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/TQXZV .