Department of Psychology.
Department of Computer Science, University of Saskatchewan.
Psychol Assess. 2019 Nov;31(11):1377-1382. doi: 10.1037/pas0000764. Epub 2019 Aug 15.
Computerized cognitive screening tools, such as the self-administered Computerized Assessment of Memory Cognitive Impairment (CAMCI), require little training and ensure standardized administration and could be an ideal test for primary care settings. We conducted a secondary analysis of a data set including 887 older adults (M age = 72.7 years, SD = 7.1 years; 32.1% male; M years education = 13.4, SD = 2.7 years) with CAMCI scores and independent diagnoses of mild cognitive impairment (MCI). A study by the CAMCI developers used a portion of this data set with a machine learning decision tree model and suggested that the CAMCI had high classification accuracy for MCI (sensitivity = 0.86, specificity = 0.94). We found similar support for accuracy (sensitivity = 0.94, specificity = 0.94) by overfitting a decision tree model, but we found evidence of lower accuracy in a cross-validation sample (sensitivity = 0.62, specificity = 0.66). A logistic regression model, however, discriminated modestly in both training (sensitivity = 0.72, specificity = 0.80) and cross-validation data sets (sensitivity = 0.69, specificity = 0.74). Evidence for strong accuracy when overfitting a decision tree model and substantially reduced accuracy in cross-validation samples was replicated across 500 bootstrapped samples. In contrast, the evidence for accuracy of the logistic regression model was similar in the training and cross-validation samples. The logistic regression model produced accuracy estimates consistent with other published CAMCI studies, suggesting evidence for classification accuracy of the CAMCI for MCI is likely modest. This case study illustrates the general need for cross-validation and careful evaluation of the generalizability of machine learning models. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved).
计算机认知筛查工具,如自我管理的计算机化认知评估记忆障碍测试(CAMCI),需要很少的培训,可以确保标准化的管理,是初级保健机构的理想测试。我们对包括 887 名年龄在 72.7 岁(标准差=7.1 岁)、32.1%为男性、受教育年限为 13.4 年(标准差=2.7 年)的老年人的数据集进行了二次分析,这些人都接受了 CAMCI 评分和轻度认知障碍(MCI)的独立诊断。CAMCI 开发者使用了该数据集的一部分,并使用机器学习决策树模型进行了一项研究,该研究表明 CAMCI 对 MCI 的分类准确率很高(敏感度=0.86,特异性=0.94)。我们通过过度拟合决策树模型发现了类似的准确性支持(敏感度=0.94,特异性=0.94),但在交叉验证样本中发现了准确性较低的证据(敏感度=0.62,特异性=0.66)。然而,逻辑回归模型在训练集(敏感度=0.72,特异性=0.80)和交叉验证数据集(敏感度=0.69,特异性=0.74)中都有适度的区分能力。在 500 个自举样本中,过度拟合决策树模型的准确性很高,而交叉验证样本的准确性大大降低,这一证据得到了复制。相比之下,逻辑回归模型在训练集和交叉验证样本中的准确性证据相似。逻辑回归模型产生的准确性估计与其他已发表的 CAMCI 研究一致,这表明 CAMCI 对 MCI 的分类准确性可能适度。本案例研究说明了交叉验证和仔细评估机器学习模型的泛化能力的普遍需求。