Cognitive correlates of antisaccade behaviour across multiple neurodegenerative diseases.

Oculomotor tasks generate a potential wealth of behavioural biomarkers for neurodegenerative diseases. Overlap between oculomotor and disease-impaired circuitry reveals the location and severity of disease processes via saccade parameters measured from eye movement tasks such as prosaccade and antisaccade. Existing studies typically examine few saccade parameters in single diseases, using multiple separate neuropsychological test scores to relate oculomotor behaviour to cognition; however, this approach produces inconsistent, ungeneralizable results and fails to consider the cognitive heterogeneity of these diseases. Comprehensive cognitive assessment and direct inter-disease comparison are crucial to accurately reveal potential saccade biomarkers. We remediate these issues by characterizing 12 behavioural parameters, selected to robustly describe saccade behaviour, derived from an interleaved prosaccade and antisaccade task in a large cross-sectional data set comprising five disease cohorts (Alzheimer's disease/mild cognitive impairment, amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, frontotemporal dementia, Parkinson's disease, and cerebrovascular disease; n = 391, age 40-87) and healthy controls (n = 149, age 42-87). These participants additionally completed an extensive neuropsychological test battery. We further subdivided each cohort by diagnostic subgroup (for Alzheimer's disease/mild cognitive impairment and frontotemporal dementia) or degree of cognitive impairment based on neuropsychological testing (all other cohorts). We sought to understand links between oculomotor parameters, their relationships to robust cognitive measures, and their alterations in disease. We performed a factor analysis evaluating interrelationships among the 12 oculomotor parameters and examined correlations of the four resultant factors to five neuropsychology-based cognitive domain scores. We then compared behaviour between the abovementioned disease subgroups and controls at the individual parameter level. We theorized that each underlying factor measured the integrity of a distinct task-relevant brain process. Notably, Factor 3 (voluntary saccade generation) and Factor 1 (task disengagements) significantly correlated with attention/working memory and executive function scores. Factor 3 also correlated with memory and visuospatial function scores. Factor 2 (pre-emptive global inhibition) correlated only with attention/working memory scores, and Factor 4 (saccade metrics) correlated with no cognitive domain scores. Impairment on several mostly antisaccade-related individual parameters scaled with cognitive impairment across disease cohorts, while few subgroups differed from controls on prosaccade parameters. The interleaved prosaccade and antisaccade task detects cognitive impairment, and subsets of parameters likely index disparate underlying processes related to different cognitive domains. This suggests that the task represents a sensitive paradigm that can simultaneously evaluate a variety of clinically relevant cognitive constructs in neurodegenerative and cerebrovascular diseases and could be developed into a screening tool applicable to multiple diagnoses.

The Quality Assurance and Quality Control Protocol for Neuropsychological Data Collection and Curation in the Ontario Neurodegenerative Disease Research Initiative (ONDRI) Study.

As large research initiatives designed to generate big data on clinical cohorts become more common, there is an increasing need to establish standard quality assurance (QA; preventing errors) and quality control (QC; identifying and correcting errors) procedures for critical outcome measures. The present article describes the QA and QC approach developed and implemented for the neuropsychology data collected as part of the Ontario Neurodegenerative Disease Research Initiative study. We report on the efficacy of our approach and provide data quality metrics. Our findings demonstrate that even with a comprehensive QA protocol, the proportion of data errors still can be high. Additionally, we show that several widely used neuropsychological measures are particularly susceptible to error. These findings highlight the need for large research programs to put into place active, comprehensive, and separate QA and QC procedures before, during, and after protocol deployment. Detailed recommendations and considerations for future studies are provided.

The utility of multivariate outlier detection techniques for data quality evaluation in large studies: an application within the ONDRI project.

BACKGROUND: Large and complex studies are now routine, and quality assurance and quality control (QC) procedures ensure reliable results and conclusions. Standard procedures may comprise manual verification and double entry, but these labour-intensive methods often leave errors undetected. Outlier detection uses a data-driven approach to identify patterns exhibited by the majority of the data and highlights data points that deviate from these patterns. Univariate methods consider each variable independently, so observations that appear odd only when two or more variables are considered simultaneously remain undetected. We propose a data quality evaluation process that emphasizes the use of multivariate outlier detection for identifying errors, and show that univariate approaches alone are insufficient. Further, we establish an iterative process that uses multiple multivariate approaches, communication between teams, and visualization for other large-scale projects to follow. METHODS: We illustrate this process with preliminary neuropsychology and gait data for the vascular cognitive impairment cohort from the Ontario Neurodegenerative Disease Research Initiative, a multi-cohort observational study that aims to characterize biomarkers within and between five neurodegenerative diseases. Each dataset was evaluated four times: with and without covariate adjustment using two validated multivariate methods - Minimum Covariance Determinant (MCD) and Candès' Robust Principal Component Analysis (RPCA) - and results were assessed in relation to two univariate methods. Outlying participants identified by multiple multivariate analyses were compiled and communicated to the data teams for verification. RESULTS: Of 161 and 148 participants in the neuropsychology and gait data, 44 and 43 were flagged by one or both multivariate methods and errors were identified for 8 and 5 participants, respectively. MCD identified all participants with errors, while RPCA identified 6/8 and 3/5 for the neuropsychology and gait data, respectively. Both outperformed univariate approaches. Adjusting for covariates had a minor effect on the participants identified as outliers, though did affect error detection. CONCLUSIONS: Manual QC procedures are insufficient for large studies as many errors remain undetected. In these data, the MCD outperforms the RPCA for identifying errors, and both are more successful than univariate approaches. Therefore, data-driven multivariate outlier techniques are essential tools for QC as data become more complex.