Studies

So far, the ACS has been used in 35+ studies of which many are still ongoing. Studies are being conducted in both the Netherlands and internationally. These studies cover a wide range of topics, from validation and feasibility studies, to collecting normative data, to clinical trials. Although the ACS was originally developed to test cognitive functioning in cancer patients, it is now also used in studies with a.o. psychiatric, traumatic brain injury, stroke, and COVID-19 patients.

Normative data

Team ACS is constantly working to improve and extend the possibilities of the ACS by creating new translations of the test battery and collecting norms from different populations for the existing translations. Normative data is crucial for accurate interpretation of test results.

Currently, we have obtained Dutch (n = 635) and British (n = 710) normative data for the Dutch and British-English versions of the ACS, respectively. American, Canadian, and Australian normative data for the American-English version, Swedish normative data for the Swedish version, Danish normative data for the Danish version, French normative data for the French version, and Spanish normative data for the Spanish version of the ACS will be available in the near future.

To obtain normative data, we aim to collect data from 600-700 healthy individuals with equal distribution across age and sex. With this data, norm scores corrected for age, sex, educational level and computer use can be calculated. The papers for the Dutch and British normative data are still in process.

Psychometric properties

Reliability and validity scores are good to adequate for most tests and comparable to results for equivalent traditional tests as reported in the literature in samples of cancer patients and healthy controls (Feenstra et al., 2017; Feenstra et al., 2018).

Correcting for computer experience

Correcting computerized neuropsychological tests for users’ (lack of) of computer experience could be useful. A dedicated study showed that correction is best done using a self-report measure, rather than a performance-based measure of computer experience (Lee Meeuw Kjoe et al., 2020).

References

Feenstra, H.E., Murre, J.M., Vermeulen, I.E., Kieffer, J.M., & Schagen, S.B. (2017). Reliability and validity of a self-administered tool for online neuropsychological testing: the Amsterdam Cognition Scan. J Clin Exp Neuropsychol, 40(3), 253-273. [doi: 10.1080/13803395.2017.1339017] [Medline: 28671504].

Feenstra, H. E., Vermeulen, I. E., Murre, J. M., & Schagen, S. B. (2017). Online cognition: factors facilitating reliable online neuropsychological test results. The Clinical Neuropsychologist, 31(1), 59-84. [doi: 10.1080/13854046.2016.1190405].

Feenstra, H.E., Vermeulen, I.E., Murre, J.M., & Schagen, S.B. (2018). Online self-administered cognitive testing using the Amsterdam Cognition Scan: establishing psychometric properties and normative data. J Medical Internet Res, 20(5), e192 [doi: 10.2196/jmir.9298].

Lee Meeuw Kjoe, P. R., Agelink van Rentergem, J. A., Vermeulen, I. E., & Schagen, S. B. (2020). How to correct for computer experience in online cognitive testing? Assessment, 28(5), 1247-1255. [doi: 10.1177/1073191120911098].