Further validation of the THINC‐it tool and extension of the normative data set in a study of n = 10.019 typical controls
Abstract Introduction We report further validation and normative data for the THINC‐Integrated Tool (THINC‐it), a measure of cognitive function designed for use with individuals living with Major Depressive Disorder, but which is finding use in further psychiatric and neurological diseases. THINC‐it...
| Main Authors: | , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Wiley
2022-12-01
|
| Series: | International Journal of Methods in Psychiatric Research |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://doi.org/10.1002/mpr.1922 |
| _version_ | 1811206432769441792 |
|---|---|
| author | Maria Dalby Peter Annas 23andMe Research Team John E. Harrison |
| author_facet | Maria Dalby Peter Annas 23andMe Research Team John E. Harrison |
| author_sort | Maria Dalby |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Abstract Introduction We report further validation and normative data for the THINC‐Integrated Tool (THINC‐it), a measure of cognitive function designed for use with individuals living with Major Depressive Disorder, but which is finding use in further psychiatric and neurological diseases. THINC‐it comprises four objective computerised cognitive tests based on traditional psychological paradigms and a version of the Perceived Deficits Questionnaire assessment. Methods Sample size of n = 10.019 typical control study participants were tested on one to two occasions to further validate the reliability of THINC‐it. Temporal reliability was assessed across 120–180 days. Results Test‐retest reliability correlations varied between r = 0.50 and 0.72 for the component measures and r = 0.75 (95% confidence intervals 0.74, 0.76) for the THINC‐it composite score. Normative data categorised by Age, Sex and Years of Education were calculated and the effect on task performance was reported. Discussion Our analysis confirms previously reported levels of reliability and validates previously reported normative data values. |
| first_indexed | 2024-04-12T03:47:32Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-5a23018bfd0f4b60b110f59a68a12f99 |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 1049-8931 1557-0657 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-04-12T03:47:32Z |
| publishDate | 2022-12-01 |
| publisher | Wiley |
| record_format | Article |
| series | International Journal of Methods in Psychiatric Research |
| spelling | doaj.art-5a23018bfd0f4b60b110f59a68a12f992022-12-22T03:49:04ZengWileyInternational Journal of Methods in Psychiatric Research1049-89311557-06572022-12-01314n/an/a10.1002/mpr.1922Further validation of the THINC‐it tool and extension of the normative data set in a study of n = 10.019 typical controlsMaria Dalby0Peter Annas123andMe Research Team2John E. Harrison3H. Lundbeck A/S Valby DenmarkH. Lundbeck A/S Valby Denmark23andMe, Inc. Sunnyvale California USAMetis Cognition Ltd Warminster Wiltshire UKAbstract Introduction We report further validation and normative data for the THINC‐Integrated Tool (THINC‐it), a measure of cognitive function designed for use with individuals living with Major Depressive Disorder, but which is finding use in further psychiatric and neurological diseases. THINC‐it comprises four objective computerised cognitive tests based on traditional psychological paradigms and a version of the Perceived Deficits Questionnaire assessment. Methods Sample size of n = 10.019 typical control study participants were tested on one to two occasions to further validate the reliability of THINC‐it. Temporal reliability was assessed across 120–180 days. Results Test‐retest reliability correlations varied between r = 0.50 and 0.72 for the component measures and r = 0.75 (95% confidence intervals 0.74, 0.76) for the THINC‐it composite score. Normative data categorised by Age, Sex and Years of Education were calculated and the effect on task performance was reported. Discussion Our analysis confirms previously reported levels of reliability and validates previously reported normative data values.https://doi.org/10.1002/mpr.1922attentioncognitioncomputerised cognitive testingdepressionmemorynorms |
| spellingShingle | Maria Dalby Peter Annas 23andMe Research Team John E. Harrison Further validation of the THINC‐it tool and extension of the normative data set in a study of n = 10.019 typical controls International Journal of Methods in Psychiatric Research attention cognition computerised cognitive testing depression memory norms |
| title | Further validation of the THINC‐it tool and extension of the normative data set in a study of n = 10.019 typical controls |
| title_full | Further validation of the THINC‐it tool and extension of the normative data set in a study of n = 10.019 typical controls |
| title_fullStr | Further validation of the THINC‐it tool and extension of the normative data set in a study of n = 10.019 typical controls |
| title_full_unstemmed | Further validation of the THINC‐it tool and extension of the normative data set in a study of n = 10.019 typical controls |
| title_short | Further validation of the THINC‐it tool and extension of the normative data set in a study of n = 10.019 typical controls |
| title_sort | further validation of the thinc it tool and extension of the normative data set in a study of n 10 019 typical controls |
| topic | attention cognition computerised cognitive testing depression memory norms |
| url | https://doi.org/10.1002/mpr.1922 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT mariadalby furthervalidationofthethincittoolandextensionofthenormativedatasetinastudyofn10019typicalcontrols AT peterannas furthervalidationofthethincittoolandextensionofthenormativedatasetinastudyofn10019typicalcontrols AT 23andmeresearchteam furthervalidationofthethincittoolandextensionofthenormativedatasetinastudyofn10019typicalcontrols AT johneharrison furthervalidationofthethincittoolandextensionofthenormativedatasetinastudyofn10019typicalcontrols |