Abstract
Remote computerized neurocognitive testing (CNT) is a promising solution to have these assessments more accessible to a population facing a global pandemic and increased aging. BrainCheck (BC) is a CNT software available on iPhone, iPad, and computer browser, designed to fit the need for remote testing. Consistent measures across these varying platforms are necessary to ensure users have consistent cognitive assessments and results. We aimed to assess BC across all administration platforms and interactions to observe any differences in assessment performance. 75 participants were enrolled in the study and were divided into two groups: participants who took BC across multiple platforms and participants who took BC in both an administered and self-administered fashion. Here we found Stroop, Digit Symbol, and Trail A/B had significantly different performance across the platforms, while Flanker, Coordination, Matrix, Immediate and Delayed Recognitions did not. Also, we found that the test metrics did not show significant differences in performance between being administered and self-administering the test. We did observe quicker completion times during the second instance of the test when taken in quick succession (within a day apart, which would not be a typical clinical pattern) and despite this, composite scores did not change reflecting the resilience of BC to practice effects. In conclusion, our results demonstrate BC may be a robust, self-administered CNT solution with an appropriate adjustment for the platform used.
Competing Interest Statement
The following authors declare the following competing interests: BH, KS, RHG, SY reports personal fees from BrainCheck, outside the submitted work; BH, RHG reports receiving stock options from BrainCheck
Funding Statement
Funding was provided by BrainCheck, Inc.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
This study protocol was reviewed and approved by Solutions IRB. All participants provided informed consent for being in the study.
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
Data may be made available by contacting the corresponding author and with a data use agreement
