RT Journal Article
SR Electronic
T1 Reliability and Validity of Cognitive Workload in Older Adults
JF medRxiv
FD Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press
SP 2020.10.26.20219881
DO 10.1101/2020.10.26.20219881
A1 Devos, Hannes
A1 Gustafson, Kathleen
A1 Ahmadnezhad, Pedram
A1 Liao, Ke
A1 Mahnken, Jonathan D.
A1 Brooks, William M.
A1 Burns, Jeffrey M.
YR 2020
UL http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2020/10/27/2020.10.26.20219881.1.abstract
AB Cognitive workload (mental effort) is a measure of attention allocation to a task, which can be administered through self-report or physiological measures. Cognitive workload is increasingly recognized as an important determinant of performance in cognitive tests and daily life activities. However, the reliability and validity of these measures have not been established in older adults with a wide range of cognitive ability. The aim of this study was to establish the test-retest reliability of the NASA-Task Load Index (NASA-TLX) and Index of Cognitive Activity (ICA), extracted from pupillary size. The convergent validity of these measures against event-related potentials (ERPs) was also investigated. A total of 38 individuals with scores on the Montreal Cognitive Assessment ranging between 17 and 30 completed a working memory test (n-back) with three levels of difficulty at baseline and two-week follow-up. Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) values of the NASA-TLX ranged between 0.71 and 0.81, demonstrating good to excellent reliability. Mean ICA scores showed fair to good reliability, with ICC’s ranging between 0.56 and 0.73. Mean ICA and NASA-TLX scores showed significant and moderate correlations (Pearson r range between 0.30 and 0.33) with P3 ERP at the midline channels. We conclude that ICC and NASA-TLX are reliable measures of cognitive workload in older adults. Further research is needed in dissecting the subjective and objective constructs of cognitive workload.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Clinical TrialN/A. This is an observational studyFunding StatementResearch reported in this publication was supported by the National Institute on Aging of the National Institutes of Health under Award Number K01 AG058785. This study was supported in part by a pilot grant of the KU Alzheimer Disease Center (P30 AG035982). The Hoglund Biomedical Imaging Center is supported in part by S10 RR29577 and generous gifts from Forrest and Sally Hoglund. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institutes of Health.Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:The studies involving human participants were reviewed and approved by University of Kansas Medical Center Internal Review Board. The patients/participants provided their written informed consent to participate.All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.YesThe raw data supporting the conclusions of this article will be made available by the authors, without undue reservation.