Comparing the computerized and standard paper‐and‐pencil version of a novel test of memory in a community‐based geriatric sample.

Background: Early and accurate diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease (AD) is critical to improve illness management and outcomes, making neuropsychological measures an essential tool for clinicians. Research has demonstrated that proactive semantic interference (PSI) and failure to recover from PSI (frPSI) are sensitive to cognitive changes in early mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and preclinical AD determined by Aβ load using PET (Loewenstein et al., 2018; Matias‐Guiu et al., 2017; Curiel et al., 2019). These novel constructs are assessed by the LASSI‐L (Crocco et al., 2018; Crocco et al., 2020). The aim of the current study was to compare a new computerized version of this measure, the LASSI‐BC, to the standard paper‐and‐pencil version of the test. Method: 110 cognitively unimpaired (CU) older adults and 79 older adults diagnosed with amnestic MCI (aMCI) were administered the paper‐and‐pencil form of the LASSI‐L, whereas 62 CU and 52 aMCI participants were administered the LASSI‐BC. Their performance was compared to assess the validity of the LASSI‐BC to discriminate between different diagnostic groups. Result: To assess the validity of the computerized version, both the aMCI and CU groups were compared using χ2 test for categorical variables and ANOVA for continuous variables, with adjustment for covariates such as degree of initial learning, sex, education, and language of evaluation. The performance of CU and aMCI groups using either form was relatively commensurate. Notably, sensitivity and specificity of measures of PSI and frPSI on both versions were calculated to assess diagnostic validity, yielding the following Results Sensitivity of 86.5%, Specificity of 88.1%, and Overall Classification of 87.4% for the LASSI‐BC relative to a Sensitivity of 65.0%, Specificity of 83.6%, and Overall Classification of 75.8% obtained for the paper‐and‐pencil LASSI‐L. Conclusion: The LASSI‐BC displayed exceptionally high diagnostic validity which was comparable to the well‐established LASSI‐L. Notably, the advantages of the LASSI‐BC include a more standardized administration, suitability for remote assessment, and an automated scoring mechanism that can be verified by a built‐in audio recording of responses. These findings support the LASSI‐BC, a novel computerized assessment, as an exceptional tool for the early identification of individuals at risk of progressing to dementia. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]