J Korean Neurosurg Soc.  2022 Mar;65(2):315-324. 10.3340/jkns.2021.0153.

A Study on Verification of Equivalence and Effectiveness of Non-Pharmacologic Dementia Prevention and Early Detection Contents : Non-Randomly Equivalent Design

• Jeong HS
• Kim OL
• Koo BH
• Kim KH
• Kim GH
• Bai DS
• Kim JY
• Chang MS
• Kim HG

• KMID: 2527188
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.3340/jkns.2021.0153

Abstract

Objective
: The aim of this study was to verify the equivalence and effectiveness of the tablet-administered Korean Repeatable Battery for the Assessment of Neuropsychological Status (K-RBANS) for the prevention and early detection of dementia.
Methods
: Data from 88 psychiatry and neurology patient samples were examined to evaluate the equivalence between tablet and paper administrations of the K-RBANS using a non-randomly equivalent group design. We calculated the prediction scores of the tablet-administered K-RBANS based on demographics and covariate-test scores for focal tests using norm samples and tested format effects. In addition, we compared the receiver operating characteristic curves to confirm the effectiveness of the K-RBANS for preventing and detecting dementia.
Results
: In the analysis of raw scores, line orientation showed a significant difference (t=-2.94, p<0.001), and subtests showed small to large effect sizes (0.04–0.86) between paper- and tablet-administered K-RBANS. To investigate the format effect, we compared the predicted scaled scores of the tablet sample to the scaled scores of the norm sample. Consequently, a small effect size (d≤0.20) was observed in most of the subtests, except word list and story recall, which showed a medium effect size (d=0.21), while picture naming and subtests of delayed memory showed significant differences in the one-sample t-test. In addition, the area under the curve of the total scale index (TSI) (0.827; 95% confidence interval, 0.738–0.916) was higher than that of the five indices, ranging from 0.688 to 0.820. The sensitivity and specificity of TSI were 80% and 76%, respectively.
Conclusion
: The overall results of this study suggest that the tablet-administered K-RBANS showed significant equivalence to the norm sample, although some subtests showed format effects, and it may be used as a valid tool for the brief screening of patients with neuropsychological disorders in Korea.

Keyword

Equivalence trial; Neuropsychological test; Research methodology; Korean Repeatable Battery for the Assessment of Neuropsychological Status (K-RBANS); Dementia

Reference

References

1. American Psychiatric Association. Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (DSM-5®). Arlington: American Psychiatric Publishing;2013.

2. Anowar M, McGrath C, Saub R. Measurement equivalence of "touchscreen" versus "paper-based" assessments of OHRQoL: a randomized crossover trial. Clin Cosmet Investig Dent. 12:199–204. 2020.

3. Babre DK. Clinical data interchange standards consortium: a bridge to overcome data standardisation. Perspect Clin Res. 4:115–116. 2013.

4. Bailey SKT, Neigel AR, Dhanani LY, Sims VK. Establishing measurement equivalence across computer- and paper-based tests of spatial cognition. Hum Factors. 60:340–350. 2018.

5. Cao Q, Tan CC, Xu W, Hu H, Cao XP, Dong Q, et al. The prevalence of dementia: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Alzheimers Dis. 73:1157–1166. 2020.

6. Daniel M, Wahlstrom D. Raw-score equivalence of computer-assisted and paper versions of WISC-V. Psychol Serv. 16:213–220. 2019.

7. Daniel MH. Equivalence of Q-interactive and paper administrations of cognitive tasks: Selected NEPSY®-II and CMS subtests (Q-interactive technical report 4). Bloomington: Pearson;2013.

8. Daniel MH. Equivalence of Q-interactive administered cognitive tasks: WAIS®-IV. Bloomington: Pearson Education, Inc;2012.

9. National Institute of Dementia. The status of dementia prevalence. Available at : https://www.nid.or.kr/info/ub_2020.aspx?no=89680.

10. Folstein MF, Folstein SE, McHugh PR. "Mini-mental state". A practical method for grading the cognitive state of patients for the clinician. J Psychiatr Res. 12:189–198. 1975.

11. Galasko DR, Gould RL, Abramson IS, Salmon DP. Measuring cognitive change in a cohort of patients with Alzheimer's disease. Stat Med. 19:1421–1432. 2000.

12. IBM Corp.. IBM SPSS statistics for windows version 25. Armonk: IBM Corp.;2018.

13. Kang Y. A normative study of the Korean Mini-Mental State Examination (K-MMSE) in the elderly. Korean J Psychology. 25:1–12. 2006.

14. Kang Y, Na DL, Hahn S. A validity study on the Korean Mini-Mental State Examination (K-MMSE) in dementia patients. J Korean Neurol Assoc. 15:300–308. 1997.

15. Kang YO JS, Na DL. Seoul Neuropsychological Screening Battery (SNSB-II). 2nd ed. Seoul: Human Brain Research & Consulting Co;2012.

16. Lee DW. What is needed for the success of national responsibility for dementia. J Korean Med Assoc. 60:618–621. 2017.

17. Lee J, Kang M, Lee O, Lee H, Kwak M, Yu W, et al. Korean dementia observatory 2020. Seoul: National Institute of Dementia;2021.

18. Lee JH, Lee KU, Lee DY, Kim KW, Jhoo JH, Kim JH, et al. Development of the Korean version of the Consortium to Establish a Registry for Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Packet (CERAD-K): clinical and neuropsychological assessment batteries. J Gerontol B Psychol Sci Soc Sci. 57:P47–P53. 2002.

19. Morris JC. The Clinical Dementia Rating (CDR): current version and scoring rules. Neurology. 43:2412–2414. 1993.

20. Oh E, Kang Y, Shin JH, Yeon BK. A validity study of K-MMSE as a screening test for dementia: comparison against a comprehensive neuropsychological evaluation. Dement Neurocognitive Disord. 9:8–12. 2010.

21. Park JO, Koo BH, Kim JY, Bai DS, Chang MS, Kim OL. The Korean repeatable battery for the assessment of neuropsychological statusupdate : psychiatric and neurosurgery patient sample validity. J Korean Neurosurg Soc. 64:125–135. 2021.

22. Randolph C. RBANS update manual. San Antonio: The Psychological Corporation;2012.

23. Statistics Korea. 2020 Senior Statistics. Daejeon: Statistics Korea;2020.

24. Statistics Korea. Future Population Special Estimation: 2017~2067 year. Daejeon: Statistics Korea;2019.

25. UN DESA. World population prospects: the 2019 revision: volume I: comprehensive tables. New York: United Nations;2019.

26. Wada-Isoe K, Kikuchi T, Umeda-Kameyama Y, Mori T, Akishita M, Nakamura Y, et al. Global clinical dementia rating score of 0.5 may not be an accurate criterion to identify individuals with mild cognitive impairment. J Alzheimers Dis Rep. 3:233–239. 2019.

27. Wahlstrom D, Daniel M, Weiss LG, Prifitera A. Chapter 11—Digital Assessment with Q-interactive in Weiss LG, Saklofske DH, Holdnack JA, Prifitera A (eds) : WISC-V Assessment and Interpretation. Cambridge: Academic Press;2016. p. p347.