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
. 2021 Apr 12;11(1):8000.
doi: 10.1038/s41598-021-87287-8.

Introducing the tablet-based Oxford Cognitive Screen-Plus (OCS-Plus) as an assessment tool for subtle cognitive impairments

Affiliations

Introducing the tablet-based Oxford Cognitive Screen-Plus (OCS-Plus) as an assessment tool for subtle cognitive impairments

Nele Demeyere et al. Sci Rep. .

Abstract

Here, we present the Oxford Cognitive Screen-Plus, a computerised tablet-based screen designed to briefly assess domain-general cognition and provide more fine-grained measures of memory and executive function. The OCS-Plus was designed to sensitively screen for cognitive impairments and provide a differentiation between memory and executive deficits. The OCS-Plus contains 10 subtasks and requires on average 24 min to complete. In this study, 320 neurologically healthy ageing participants (age M = 62.66, SD = 13.75) from three sites completed the OCS-Plus. The convergent validity of this assessment was established in comparison to the ACE-R, CERAD and Rey-Osterrieth. Divergent validity was established through comparison with the BDI and tests measuring divergent cognitive domains. Internal consistency of each subtask was evaluated, and test-retest reliability was determined. We established the normative impairment cut-offs for each of the subtasks. Predicted convergent and divergent validity was found, high internal consistency for most measures was also found with the exception of restricted range tasks, as well as strong test-retest reliability, which provided evidence of test stability. Further research demonstrating the use and validity of the OCS-Plus in various clinical populations is required. The OCS-Plus is presented as a standardised cognitive assessment tool, normed and validated in a sample of neurologically healthy participants. The OCS-Plus will be available as an Android App and provides an automated report of domain-general cognitive impairments in executive attention and memory.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no competing interests.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Part (A) represents the base report outcome wheel from the Oxford Cognitive Screen-Plus which is edited depending on performance of the participants (i.e., impaired or spared compared to norms), and (B) Represents a mockup of a patient who was impaired in the Trails and Rule Finding tasks compared to age matched normative data and who was not assessed with the picture naming task. Figure Copy and Figure Copy Recall are grey due to not currently having automatic scoring implemented in the app. Figure created in Inkscape (version 1.0.2, https://inkscape.org/) available at https://osf.io/ajzht/ under a CC-BY4.0 license.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. 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. 1975;12:189–198. doi: 10.1016/0022-3956(75)90026-6. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Nasreddine ZS, et al. The Montreal Cognitive Assessment, MoCA: A brief screening tool for mild cognitive impairment. J. Am. Geriatr. Soc. 2005;53:695–699. doi: 10.1111/j.1532-5415.2005.53221.x. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Robotham RJ, Riis JO, Demeyere N. A Danish version of the Oxford cognitive screen: A stroke-specific screening test as an alternative to the MoCA. Neuropsychol. Dev. Cogn. B Aging Neuropsychol. Cogn. 2020;27:52–65. doi: 10.1080/13825585.2019.1577352. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Wong A, et al. Montreal cognitive assessment: One cutoff never fits all. Stroke. 2015;46:3547–3550. doi: 10.1161/STROKEAHA.115.011226. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Pedersen PM, Stig Jørgensen H, Nakayama H, Raaschou HO, Olsen TS. Aphasia in acute stroke: Incidence, determinants, and recovery. Ann. Neurol. 1995;38:659–666. doi: 10.1002/ana.410380416. - DOI - PubMed

Publication types