Park Jeongbin, Kim Chae Hyun, Park Sungjin, Kim Hae In, Han Ji Won, Kim Ki Woong
PlanB4U Research Institute, Seongnam, Korea.
Department of Neuropsychiatry, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital, Seongnam, Korea.
J Korean Med Sci. 2025 Sep 8;40(35):e225. doi: 10.3346/jkms.2025.40.e225.
Neuropsychological assessments are critical to cognitive care, but are time-consuming and often of variable quality. Automated tools, such as ReadSmart4U, improve report quality and consistency while meeting the growing demand for cognitive assessments.
This retrospective cross-sectional study analysed 150 neuropsychological assessments stratified by cognitive diagnosis (normal cognition, mild cognitive impairment and Alzheimer's disease) from the Clinical Data Warehouse of a university-affiliated referral hospital (2010-2020). Reports were generated for each assessment by ReadSmart4U and certified clinical psychologists (CCPs). Three blinded CCPs assessed report quality using the Integrated Scoring for Quality Assessment of Structure (ISQAS) for absolute quality and the Integrated Scoring for Quality Comparison of Superiority (ISQCS) for paired comparisons. Domains assessed included terminology accuracy, interpretation accuracy, usefulness and writing quality.
ReadSmart4U-generated reports outperformed CCP reports in all ISQAS domains, with mean overall quality scores of 87.3 ± 3.4 vs. 74.5 ± 6.7 ( < 0.001). Domain-specific scores were higher for terminology accuracy (31.4 ± 1.5 vs. 26.8 ± 2.1), interpretation accuracy (32.2 ± 1.7 vs. 27.3 ± 2.4), usefulness (10.8 ± 0.9 vs. 9.2 ± 1.2) and writing quality (14.5 ± 0.6 vs. 12.7 ± 1.1; all < 0.001). In the ISQCS evaluations, ReadSmart4U reports were judged superior in 80.2% of cases for overall quality and 58.0-88.2% for domains ( < 0.001).
ReadSmart4U significantly improves the quality and consistency of neuropsychological assessment reports compared to CCPs, reducing workload and supporting the integration of automated tools into clinical workflows to improve cognitive care.
神经心理学评估对认知护理至关重要,但耗时且质量往往参差不齐。诸如ReadSmart4U之类的自动化工具在满足对认知评估不断增长的需求的同时,提高了报告质量和一致性。
这项回顾性横断面研究分析了一家大学附属医院临床数据仓库(2010 - 2020年)中按认知诊断(正常认知、轻度认知障碍和阿尔茨海默病)分层的150项神经心理学评估。ReadSmart4U和认证临床心理学家(CCP)为每项评估生成报告。三名不知情的CCP使用结构质量评估综合评分(ISQAS)评估绝对质量,使用优势质量比较综合评分(ISQCS)进行配对比较来评估报告质量。评估的领域包括术语准确性、解释准确性、有用性和写作质量。
ReadSmart4U生成的报告在所有ISQAS领域均优于CCP报告,总体质量平均得分分别为87.3 ± 3.4和74.5 ± 6.7(<0.001)。术语准确性(31.4 ± 1.5对26.8 ± 2.1)、解释准确性(32.2 ± 1.7对27.3 ± 2.4)、有用性(10.8 ± 0.9对9.2 ± 1.2)和写作质量(14.5 ± 0.6对12.7 ± 1.1;均<0.001)的特定领域得分更高。在ISQCS评估中,ReadSmart4U报告在80.2%的总体质量病例和58.0 - 88.2%的领域中被判定为更优(<0.001)。
与CCP相比,ReadSmart4U显著提高了神经心理学评估报告的质量和一致性,减少了工作量,并支持将自动化工具整合到临床工作流程中以改善认知护理。