Objective: With increasing interest in computerized neurocognitive assessment tools (NCATs) is a need to directly compare the tests, especially in their ability to detect cognitive decline after mild TBI. However, NCATs are constructed differently and report different types of scores, rendering direct comparisons difficult. We used overall number of low scores as an alternate approach to compare two NCATs. Method: 44 control service members (SMs) and 30 SMs with acute mTBI completed the Automated Neuropsychological Assessment Metrics version 4 (ANAM4) and CogState in the same session, with only valid data included in analyses. The number of low scores ( < 25th percentile) and the number of borderline impaired scores ( < 10th percentile) were computed for both batteries. Using unadjusted Risk Ratios (RR) we identified a cutoff that distinguished controls from the mTBI group. We then looked at agreement between the NCATs for those cutoffs. Results: 3+ low scores on...

Article PDF first page preview

Article PDF first page preview
Article PDF first page preview
You do not currently have access to this article.