RT Journal Article
SR Electronic
T1 The validation of a mobile sensor-based neurobehavioral assessment with machine learning analytics
JF medRxiv
FD Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press
SP 2021.04.29.21256265
DO 10.1101/2021.04.29.21256265
A1 Kelly L. Sloane
A1 Shenly Glenn
A1 Joel A. Mefford
A1 Zilong Zhao
A1 Man Xu
A1 Guifeng Zhou
A1 Rachel Mace
A1 Amy E Wright
A1 Argye E. Hillis
YR 2021
UL http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/06/06/2021.04.29.21256265.abstract
AB Background Mild cognitive impairment is a common yet complex condition that is often underdiagnosed in the early stages. Miro Health is a mobile platform for the self-administration of sensor-based cognitive and behavioral assessments that was developed to measure factors typical of legacy neuropsychological tests in addition to behaviors that are currently left to subjective clinical impression such as eye movement, language, and processing speed.Objective Studies were conducted to measure Miro Health’s concurrent validity, test-retest reliability, and amnestic MCI classification performance.Method Spearman correlations were calculated to estimate the concurrent validity of Miro Health variables with legacy neuropsychological test variables using data from 160 study participants. Fifty-nine healthy controls were assessed at three time points to evaluate the test-retest reliability of Miro Health scores. Reliability was quantified with the scores’ intraclass correlations. Learning effects were measured as trends. In addition, a machine learning algorithm combined Miro Health variable scores into a Risk Score designed to distinguish 65 healthy controls (HC), 38 MCI participants (21 amnestic MCI (aMCI), and 17 non-amnestic MCI (naMCI)).Results Significant correlations of Miro Health variables with legacy neuropsychological test variables were observed. Longitudinal studies show agreement of subsequent measurements and minimal learning effects. The Risk Score distinguished aMCI from healthy controls with an Area Under the Receiver Operator Curve (AUROC) of 0.97; the naMCI participants and controls were separated with an AUROC of 0.80, and the combined MCI group (aMCI + naMCI) was separated from healthy controls with an AUROC of 0.89.Conclusion Miro Health includes valid and reliable versions of variable scores that are analogous to legacy neuropsychological variable scores and a machine-learning derived risk score that effectively distinguishes HCs and individuals with MCI.Competing Interest StatementThe Miro assessment platform is a commercial product of Miro Health, Inc. The authors SG, MX, ZZ, and GZ are employed by Miro Health, Inc. The author JAM is a consultant for and holds equity in Miro Health. The salary of author RM was supplemented by Miro Health. Authors KLS, AEW, and AEH have no potential conflicts of interest to disclose. No authors are US government employees Funding StatementThis study was funded by Miro Health, Inc. The Miro assessment platform is a commercial product of Miro Health, Inc. The authors SG, MX, ZZ, and GZ are employed by Miro Health, Inc. The author JAM is a consultant for and holds equity in Miro Health. The salary of author RM was supplemented by Miro Health. Authors KLS, AEW, and AEH have no potential conflicts of interest to disclose. 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:This study was approved by the Johns Hopkins University Institutional Review Board (protocol 00088299) and New England IRB (protocols 120180208, 120180211, 120180209 and 12080253) for the use of human subjects. Capacity was determined and consent was obtained from each participant. 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.YesData used in the paper is temporarily not available for public.