Use of the Clock Drawing Test and the Rey-Osterrieth Complex Figure Test-copy with convolutional neural networks to predict cognitive impairment.
Clock Drawing Test
Cognitive impairment
Convolutional neural network
Machine learning
Rey–Osterrieth Complex Figure Test
TensorFlow
Journal
Alzheimer's research & therapy
ISSN: 1758-9193
Titre abrégé: Alzheimers Res Ther
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101511643
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
20 04 2021
20 04 2021
Historique:
received:
29
11
2020
accepted:
05
04
2021
entrez:
21
4
2021
pubmed:
22
4
2021
medline:
25
6
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
The Clock Drawing Test (CDT) and Rey-Osterrieth Complex Figure Test (RCFT) are widely used as a part of neuropsychological test batteries to assess cognitive function. Our objective was to confirm the prediction accuracies of the RCFT-copy and CDT for cognitive impairment (CI) using convolutional neural network algorithms as a screening tool. The CDT and RCFT-copy data were obtained from patients aged 60-80 years who had more than 6 years of education. In total, 747 CDT and 980 RCFT-copy figures were utilized. Convolutional neural network algorithms using TensorFlow (ver. 2.3.0) on the Colab cloud platform ( www.colab. google.com ) were used for preprocessing and modeling. We measured the prediction accuracy of each drawing test 10 times using this dataset with the following classes: normal cognition (NC) vs. mildly impaired cognition (MI), NC vs. severely impaired cognition (SI), and NC vs. CI (MI + SI). The accuracy of the CDT was better for differentiating MI (CDT, 78.04 ± 2.75; RCFT-copy, not being trained) and SI from NC (CDT, 91.45 ± 0.83; RCFT-copy, 90.27 ± 1.52); however, the RCFT-copy was better at predicting CI (CDT, 77.37 ± 1.77; RCFT, 83.52 ± 1.41). The accuracy for a 3-way classification (NC vs. MI vs. SI) was approximately 71% for both tests; no significant difference was found between them. The two drawing tests showed good performance for predicting severe impairment of cognition; however, a drawing test alone is not enough to predict overall CI. There are some limitations to our study: the sample size was small, all the participants did not perform both the CDT and RCFT-copy, and only the copy condition of the RCFT was used. Algorithms involving memory performance and longitudinal changes are worth future exploration. These results may contribute to improved home-based healthcare delivery.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
The Clock Drawing Test (CDT) and Rey-Osterrieth Complex Figure Test (RCFT) are widely used as a part of neuropsychological test batteries to assess cognitive function. Our objective was to confirm the prediction accuracies of the RCFT-copy and CDT for cognitive impairment (CI) using convolutional neural network algorithms as a screening tool.
METHODS
The CDT and RCFT-copy data were obtained from patients aged 60-80 years who had more than 6 years of education. In total, 747 CDT and 980 RCFT-copy figures were utilized. Convolutional neural network algorithms using TensorFlow (ver. 2.3.0) on the Colab cloud platform ( www.colab.
RESEARCH
google.com ) were used for preprocessing and modeling. We measured the prediction accuracy of each drawing test 10 times using this dataset with the following classes: normal cognition (NC) vs. mildly impaired cognition (MI), NC vs. severely impaired cognition (SI), and NC vs. CI (MI + SI).
RESULTS
The accuracy of the CDT was better for differentiating MI (CDT, 78.04 ± 2.75; RCFT-copy, not being trained) and SI from NC (CDT, 91.45 ± 0.83; RCFT-copy, 90.27 ± 1.52); however, the RCFT-copy was better at predicting CI (CDT, 77.37 ± 1.77; RCFT, 83.52 ± 1.41). The accuracy for a 3-way classification (NC vs. MI vs. SI) was approximately 71% for both tests; no significant difference was found between them.
CONCLUSIONS
The two drawing tests showed good performance for predicting severe impairment of cognition; however, a drawing test alone is not enough to predict overall CI. There are some limitations to our study: the sample size was small, all the participants did not perform both the CDT and RCFT-copy, and only the copy condition of the RCFT was used. Algorithms involving memory performance and longitudinal changes are worth future exploration. These results may contribute to improved home-based healthcare delivery.
Identifiants
pubmed: 33879200
doi: 10.1186/s13195-021-00821-8
pii: 10.1186/s13195-021-00821-8
pmc: PMC8059231
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
85Références
Cell Syst. 2016 Jan 27;2(1):12-4
pubmed: 27136685
Alzheimers Dement (N Y). 2019 Dec 10;5:918-925
pubmed: 31879701
Sci Rep. 2019 Mar 5;9(1):3543
pubmed: 30837580
J Infect Public Health. 2020 Oct;13(10):1381-1396
pubmed: 32646771
J Am Geriatr Soc. 1986 Jan;34(1):12-9
pubmed: 3941239
Neuropsychologia. 1981;19(3):375-83
pubmed: 7266830
PLoS One. 2018 May 3;13(5):e0195605
pubmed: 29723236
Arthroscopy. 2021 May;37(5):1694-1697
pubmed: 32828936
J Alzheimers Dis. 2020;75(3):717-728
pubmed: 32333585
Mach Learn. 2016 Mar;102(3):393-441
pubmed: 27057085
Medicine (Baltimore). 2020 Apr;99(16):e19620
pubmed: 32311931
J Korean Med Sci. 2010 Jul;25(7):1071-6
pubmed: 20592901
Sensors (Basel). 2020 Oct 23;20(21):
pubmed: 33114070
PLoS One. 2017 Jun 29;12(6):e0179804
pubmed: 28662070
Int J Geriatr Psychiatry. 2000 Jun;15(6):548-61
pubmed: 10861923
Arch Neurol. 2008 Aug;65(8):1091-5
pubmed: 18695059
NPJ Digit Med. 2020 Sep 11;3:118
pubmed: 32984550
Neuropsychiatry Neuropsychol Behav Neurol. 1999 Apr;12(2):95-101
pubmed: 10223256
J Clin Psychol. 1993 Jan;49(1):54-60
pubmed: 8425935
Neuroimage. 2010 Aug 1;52(1):234-44
pubmed: 20382237
Psychogeriatrics. 2018 Mar;18(2):123-131
pubmed: 29417704
Arch Neurol. 2004 Jan;61(1):59-66
pubmed: 14732621
Dement Neurocogn Disord. 2018 Sep;17(3):100-109
pubmed: 30906399
Clin Neuropsychol. 2000 Nov;14(4):551-4
pubmed: 11262724
Proc AAAI Conf Artif Intell. 2014 Jul;2014:2898-2905
pubmed: 27066307
J Clin Neuropsychol. 1982 May;4(1):51-8
pubmed: 7096586
Psychiatry Investig. 2018 Sep;15(9):869-875
pubmed: 30176706
Dement Geriatr Cogn Disord. 2008;26(6):483-9
pubmed: 18987468