Table 1.
Summary of all the experiments.
| Experiment | Number of Participants | Age mean years, SD [min, max] | Education mean years, SD [min, max] | Gender (#female) | Cognitive Tests | ICA Platform |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 212 | 74,10, [46, 98] | 9, 6, [0, 23] | 110 (51%) | MoCA, CGN_ICA | Raspberry Pi (RaPi) |
| 2 | 58 | 62, 6, [54, 79] | 14, 5, [3, 24] | 33 (56%) | MoCA, ACE-R, CGN_ICA | iPad |
| 3 | 166 | 37,10, [19, 65] | 14, 3, [1, 20] | 125 (75%) | SDMT, BVMT-R, CVLT-II, CGN_ICA | iPad |
| 3′ (re-test) | 44 | 38, 12 [18, 64] | 14, 2 [8, 20] | 29 (66%) | CGN_ICA, SDMT | iPad |
| 4 | 12 | 29, 3, [20, 36] | 19, 4, [15, 24] | 5 (41%) | CGN_ICA | Web |
For each experiment, the table shows number of participants, their demographics (age, education and gender), and the cognitive tests they have taken in each experiment. A total number of 448 volunteers took part in these experiments. Experiments 1 and 2 were to establish CGN_ICA correlation with standard-of-care cognitive assessment tools for MCI and dementia screening in older adults (i.e. MoCA and ACE-R). The third experiment covers younger individuals (19 to 65 years-old) who have taken CGN_ICA along with three other standard cognitive tests, particularly suitable for this age-range. Experiment 3′ is a test-retest: 44 volunteers who participated in the third experiment were called back after five weeks (+−15 days) to take the CGN_ICA and SDMT test for the second time. This was to assess CGN_ICA test-retest reliability (r = 0.96, p < 10−7)]). Experiment 4 is the learning-effect experiment in which 12 young university students took the CGN_ICA test every other day for two weeks to see whether CGN_ICA is free from learning bias and suitable for micro-monitoring of cognitive performance.