Valentina Giunchiglia, Dragos-Cristian Gruia, Annalaura Lerede, William Trender, Peter Hellyer, Adam Hampshire
{"title":"An iterative approach for estimating domain-specific cognitive abilities from large scale online cognitive data","authors":"Valentina Giunchiglia, Dragos-Cristian Gruia, Annalaura Lerede, William Trender, Peter Hellyer, Adam Hampshire","doi":"10.1038/s41746-024-01327-x","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Online cognitive tasks are gaining traction as scalable and cost-effective alternatives to traditional supervised assessments. However, variability in peoples’ home devices, visual and motor abilities, and speed-accuracy biases confound the specificity with which online tasks can measure cognitive abilities. To address these limitations, we developed IDoCT (Iterative Decomposition of Cognitive Tasks), a method for estimating domain-specific cognitive abilities and trial-difficulty scales from task performance timecourses in a data-driven manner while accounting for device and visuomotor latencies, unspecific cognitive processes and speed-accuracy trade-offs. IDoCT can operate with any computerised task where cognitive difficulty varies across trials. Using data from 388,757 adults, we show that IDoCT successfully dissociates cognitive abilities from these confounding factors. The resultant cognitive scores exhibit stronger dissociation of psychometric factors, improved cross-participants distributions, and meaningful demographic’s associations. We propose that IDoCT can enhance the precision of online cognitive assessments, especially in large scale clinical and research applications.</p>","PeriodicalId":19349,"journal":{"name":"NPJ Digital Medicine","volume":"22 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":12.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"NPJ Digital Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1038/s41746-024-01327-x","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Online cognitive tasks are gaining traction as scalable and cost-effective alternatives to traditional supervised assessments. However, variability in peoples’ home devices, visual and motor abilities, and speed-accuracy biases confound the specificity with which online tasks can measure cognitive abilities. To address these limitations, we developed IDoCT (Iterative Decomposition of Cognitive Tasks), a method for estimating domain-specific cognitive abilities and trial-difficulty scales from task performance timecourses in a data-driven manner while accounting for device and visuomotor latencies, unspecific cognitive processes and speed-accuracy trade-offs. IDoCT can operate with any computerised task where cognitive difficulty varies across trials. Using data from 388,757 adults, we show that IDoCT successfully dissociates cognitive abilities from these confounding factors. The resultant cognitive scores exhibit stronger dissociation of psychometric factors, improved cross-participants distributions, and meaningful demographic’s associations. We propose that IDoCT can enhance the precision of online cognitive assessments, especially in large scale clinical and research applications.
期刊介绍:
npj Digital Medicine is an online open-access journal that focuses on publishing peer-reviewed research in the field of digital medicine. The journal covers various aspects of digital medicine, including the application and implementation of digital and mobile technologies in clinical settings, virtual healthcare, and the use of artificial intelligence and informatics.
The primary goal of the journal is to support innovation and the advancement of healthcare through the integration of new digital and mobile technologies. When determining if a manuscript is suitable for publication, the journal considers four important criteria: novelty, clinical relevance, scientific rigor, and digital innovation.