Objective: Several scoring methods have been developed to analyze performance on the Clock Drawing Test (CDT), a screening measure of cognitive decline. Preliminary analyses have shown that a novel computerized CDT scoring system using the Gardony Map Drawing Analyzer (GMDA; Gardony et al., 2013) accurately detects impaired CDT performance. However, the validity of the GMDA has not been examined in a clinical population. The purpose of this study was to compare CDT performance using the GMDA scoring system to other neuropsychological tests in a mixed clinical sample. Method: Forty-one adult outpatients, who were referred for neuropsychological evaluation due to cognitive complaints, were administered the CDT as a part of a comprehensive test battery. In addition to the CDT, the following tests involving visuomotor processing were administered and included in the analyses: Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale-Fourth Edition (WAIS-IV) Block Design and Matrix Reasoning, Trail Making Test (TMT), and Repeatable Battery for the Assessment of Neuropsychological Status (RBANS) Figure Copy and Line Orientation. Results: Analyses revealed moderately high significant correlations between several GMDA scores and the tests of visuomotor processing (r = .36 − .51). After controlling for these test scores and age, GMDA scores significantly accounted for 22% more variance in RBANS Total scores. Conclusion: These preliminary validity data indicate that CDT performance analyzed using the GMDA scoring system is significantly related to global cognitive functioning after controlling for visuomotor processing. These results support the utility of the GMDA in neuropsychological assessment. Nevertheless, continued examination of the validity of GMDA scores in clinical populations is recommended.
Exploring the Validity of a Computerized Clock Drawing Test Scoring System in a Mixed Clinical Sample
A Parks, E Logue, K Carter, D Scarisbrick, J Linck; C-59
Exploring the Validity of a Computerized Clock Drawing Test Scoring System in a Mixed Clinical Sample. Arch Clin Neuropsychol 2015; 30 (6): 584. doi: 10.1093/arclin/acv047.261
Download citation file:
© 2017 Oxford University Press×