Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2017 Nov;31(8):1375-1386.
doi: 10.1080/13854046.2016.1275819. Epub 2017 Jan 12.

Convergent and criterion validity of the CogState computerized brief battery cognitive assessment in women with and without breast cancer

Sunita K Patel  1   2 , Adrienne M Meier  1   2 , Nathaniel Fernandez  1 , Tracy T Y Lo  1   2 , Colleen Moore  1 , Nicole Delgado  1
Affiliations

Convergent and criterion validity of the CogState computerized brief battery cognitive assessment in women with and without breast cancer

Sunita K Patel et al. Clin Neuropsychol. 2017 Nov.

Abstract

Objective: Computerized tests have increasingly garnered interest for assessing cognitive functioning due to their potential logistical and financial advantages over traditional 'pencil and-paper' neuropsychological tests. However, psychometric information is necessary to guide decisions about their clinical and research utility with varied populations. We explored the convergent construct validity and criterion validity of the CogState computerized tests in breast cancer survivors, a group known to present with mostly mild, subtle cognitive dysfunction.

Method: Fifty-three post-menopausal women (26 breast cancer survivors, 27 healthy controls) completed the CogState Brief Battery tests with passed performance checks, conceptually matched traditional neuropsychological tests, and a self-report measure of daily functioning, the Functional Activities Questionnaire.

Results: Significant positive correlations were found between the CogState Brief Battery tests and traditional neuropsychological tests, although the traditional tests specifically hypothesized to correlate with CogState tests did not reach statistical significance. Analysis of Covariance results showed preliminary support for criterion validity, as the patient and control groups differed on the traditional test of working memory (Digits Backwards, p = .01), with a trend towards significance for the CogState test of working memory (One Back, p = .02), controlled for age, race, and mood.

Conclusions: The results provide preliminary support for further research to determine if the CogState tests are viable as screening tools to detect subtle cognitive differences between breast cancer survivors and healthy women. Our study was limited by the low base rate of cognitive impairment and small sample size. We recommend further research employing sufficiently powered sample sizes and a longitudinal, repeated measures study design.

Keywords: CogState; Neurocognitive testing; breast cancer; computerized cognitive testing; validity.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Conflict of Interest Statement: The authors have no financial disclosures for this manuscript.

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

See all "Cited by" articles

References

    1. Bower JE. Behavioral symptoms in patients with breast cancer and survivors. Journal of Clinical Oncology. 2008;26(5):768–777. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2007.14.3248. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Brandt J, Benedict HB. The Hopkins Verbal Learning Test-Revised: Professional Manual. Lutz, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources; 2001.
    1. Caine C, Deshmukh S, Gondi V, Mehta M, Tome W, Corn BW, … Kachnic L. CogState computerized memory tests in patients with brain metastases: Secondary endpoint results of NRG oncology RTOG 0933. Journal of Neurooncology. 2016;126(2):327–336. doi: 10.1007/s11060-015-1971-2. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Cargin JW, Maruff P, Collie A, Masters C. Mild memory impairment in healthy older adults is distinct from normal aging. Brain and Cognition. 2006;60(2):146–155. doi: 10.1016/j.bandc.2005.10.004. - DOI - PubMed
    1. CogState Limited. CogState research manual version 6. Melbourne, Australia: 2011.

LinkOut - more resources