Clinical Validation of Cognivue® - A Computerized Alternative to the Montreal Cognitive Assessment Test

Abstract

Aims: To determine the utility of Cognivue ® compared to the MoCA for reliably assessing cognitive impairment (CI). Methods: Adults ≥55y completed two testing sessions 1-2 weeks apart during which both Cognivue ® and MoCA were conducted. Correlation analyses were performed for overall scores on each neuropsychological test and retest reliability was assessed via regression analyses. Results: 100 participants completed the testing sessions. A statistically significant positive correlation between overall scores on Cognivue ® and MoCA was found (r = 0.38; p<0.001). Test-retest reliability was greater for Cognivue ® than MoCA for participants initially classified as having no CI (87.3% vs. 73.1%). Regression analyses of test-retest reliability revealed a tighter and more linear pattern for Cognivue ® than MoCA, however a statistically significant regression fit for both was demonstrated (Cognivue ® : R2 = 0.439, r = 0.663; MoCA: R2 = 0.378, r = 0.615). Conclusions: Cognivue ® demonstrated comparable reliability to MoCA, thus providing an efficient, easy-to-use alternative for assessing CI.