Validity and sensitivity of a pen computer battery of performance tests

Abstract

This study compared administration of performance tests and visual analogue scales (VAS) using a newly developed pen computer (PenC) battery with established tests using either pencil-and-paper (PP) or conventional computer. The performance of 47 subjects (23 male, age 18-45 years, weight 51-112 kg) was compared on the two systems after a dose of ethanol (0.8 g/kg up to a maximum of 60 g for males, 50 g for females) or placebo in a double-blind two-period randomized crossover study. Mean (SD) blood ethanol concentrations (breathalyser) were 94.5 mg/100 ml (21.9) at the start of the test battery (30 min post-drink) and 80.2 (13.0) at the end of the battery (75 min post-drink). Ethanol effects were found in all tests, with most outcome measures showing significant slowing or loss of accuracy. Results from the Rapid Visual Information Processing, Sentence Verification and Continuous Attention tasks show that the ethanol-placebo difference and the statistical significance of this difference are in close correspondence for the two modes of administration. The pen computer versions of these tasks may therefore be used as direct replacements for the previous versions. Digit-Symbol and maze tasks did not correspond so closely both showing differences in the speed-accuracy trade-off between the two modes. These tests, however, are sensitive to the effects of ethanol, and may be useful in their own right. Principal component analysis suggested that VAS may be grouped into two factors: (1) 'functional integrity', including measures of alertness and perceived proficiency, and (2) 'mood', including happiness and sociability. Factor 1 showed substantial effects of ethanol, while factor 2 was unchanged. There was close agreement between the results from PP and PenC for both factors as well as for the Sober-Drunk scale, which showed the expected effects of ethanol. Thus pen computer VAS perform in a similar way to the PP versions.

Selective effects of clonidine and temazepam on attention and memory

“…For visual analogue scales, the scores for the individual scales were first combined into two factors, Functional Integrity and Mood, as described previously (Cameron et al, 2001). Means of the post-dose values of the factor scores as well as the individual scores for the Sober-Drunk, Alert-Drowsy and Normal-Abnormal scales were analysed as described above.…”

“…Time taken and number of errors (times when the pen left the track) were recorded. (Wechsler, 1958;Cameron et al, 2001) In this pencil-and-paper task, a key was provided which matched nine symbols to the digits 1-9. Below this, there was a series of random digits with a box beneath each digit in which the subject wrote the corresponding symbol.…”

Electronic data capture using the Womac® NRS 3.1 Index (m-Womac®): a pilot study of repeated independent remote data capture in OA

“…More recently, in various fields of medicine, there has been growing interest in electronic data capture (EDC) using a number of different platforms and applications (Dale and Hagen 2007;Abasomi et al 2006;Bolger et al 2003;Stubbs et al 2000;Blake 2008;Tufano and Karras 2005;Palmblad and Tiplady 2004;Cameron et al 2001;Kvien et al 2005;Tseng et al 1998;Begg et al 2003). In OA, there are already several published validation studies of EDC for the WOMAC Ò Index data using desktop and laptop computers (Bellamy et al 1997;Theiler et al 2002;Theiler et al 2004;Bischoff-Ferrari et al 2005), and growing interest in delivering the WOMAC Ò Index on personal digital assistants (PDAs).…”

Symbol–digit substitution and individual differences in visual search ability

“…Performance on the test was a significant variable in discriminant function analyses of long-and short-term schizophrenics (Royer & Janowitch, 1973). Substitution tests also have utility in demonstrating the effects of alcohol and medications on performance (e.g., Cameron, Sinclair, & Tiplady, 2001;Kaplan et al, 1998;Mattila, Aranko, Mattila, & Paakkari, 1994). Despite the wide application of substitution tests there is no clear agreement on what the test measures.…”