Testing method and device for assessing cognitive decline

Abstract

To provide a test method and apparatus for evaluating cognitive decline.SOLUTION: A test method for evaluating cognitive decline is provided, comprising: a testing step of testing how well a user performs missions presented for each of a plurality of test items and calculating a test score for each of the plurality of test items; a category classification step of classifying at least one test item from among the plurality of test items as one neurocognitive category from among a plurality of neurocognitive categories; and an evaluation step of evaluating whether there is cognitive decline in the one neurocognitive category or not based on a test score of the test item classified as the one neurocognitive category.SELECTED DRAWING: Figure 17

Description

[Technical field]

[0001] The present invention relates to a testing method and device for assessing cognitive decline. [Background technology]

[0002] As the aging society continues, the number of dementia patients is rapidly increasing. However, there is currently no treatment for dementia. Therefore, the most innovative measure against dementia is to detect mild cognitive impairment, which has a high probability of developing into dementia, early and provide preventive treatment. Mild cognitive impairment refers to a high-risk state before dementia. It has been reported that approximately 10-15% of patients with mild cognitive impairment have dementia.

[0003] However, there is no standardized method for diagnosing mild cognitive impairment, and doctors meet with patients to comprehensively examine their condition and make a diagnosis. Conventional tests to evaluate cognitive decline are mainly composed of tests to evaluate memory, and although they are effective in evaluating Alzheimer's disease dementia, which is characterized by memory decline, there is a problem that their accuracy is reduced when evaluating other dementias, which are characterized by cognitive decline other than memory.

[0004] The above-mentioned background art is technical information possessed by the inventor for the purpose of deriving the present invention or acquired in the process of deriving the present invention, and is not necessarily publicly known art that was disclosed to the general public prior to the filing of the application of the present invention. [Prior art documents] [Patent documents]

[0005] [Patent Document 1] Republic of Korea Domestic Patent Publication No. 10-2018-0109529 (2018.10.08.) Summary of the Invention [Problem to be solved by the invention]

[0006] One object of the present invention is to provide a clear and easy-to-understand user interface during an online test to assess cognitive decline.

[0007] One object of the present invention is to allow a user to directly intervene in an online test to evaluate cognitive decline, thereby minimizing the intervention of an examiner.

[0008] One objective of the present invention is to provide an online cognitive decline assessment test that allows for immediate review of test results after completion and for review and tracking of stored past results.

[0009] The problems to be solved by the present invention are not limited to the problems described above, and other problems and advantages of the present invention not mentioned can be understood from the following description and will be more clearly understood in the embodiments of the present invention. Furthermore, it will be understood that the problems and advantages to be solved by the present invention can be realized by the means and combinations thereof shown in the claims. [Means for solving the problem]

[0010] A testing method for assessing cognitive decline according to one embodiment of the present invention is a testing method for assessing cognitive decline executed by a processor of a testing device for assessing cognitive decline, and includes a testing step of testing the degree to which a user performs a mission presented for each of a plurality of test items and calculating a test score for each of the plurality of test items, a categorization step of classifying at least one of the plurality of test items into one of a plurality of neurocognitive categories, and an evaluation step of evaluating whether or not there is cognitive decline in the neurocognitive category based on the test score for the test item classified into the neurocognitive category.

[0011] An examination device for assessing cognitive decline according to one embodiment of the present invention includes a processor and a memory operably connected to the processor and storing at least one code executed by the processor, and the memory can store code that, when executed via the processor, causes the processor to perform a test process for testing the extent to which a user performs a mission presented for each of a plurality of test items, calculate a test score for each of the plurality of test items, perform a category classification process for classifying at least one of the plurality of test items into one of a plurality of neurocognitive categories, and perform an evaluation process for evaluating whether or not there is cognitive decline in the neurocognitive category based on the test score for the test item classified into the neurocognitive category.

[0012] Additionally, other methods and systems for implementing the present invention, and computer readable recording media having computer programs stored thereon for carrying out the methods may also be provided.

[0013] Other aspects, features and advantages in addition to those described above will become apparent from the following drawings, claims and detailed description of the invention. Effect of the Invention

[0014] According to the present invention, by providing a clear and easy-to-understand user interface during an online test to evaluate cognitive decline, elderly users can easily perform a test to evaluate cognitive decline.

[0015] In addition, when conducting an online test to evaluate cognitive decline, the user can directly intervene and perform the test, thereby minimizing the intervention of the examiner, thereby improving the accuracy of the test for the user.

[0016] In addition, after completing the online test to assess cognitive decline, the test results can be checked immediately and past results can be checked and tracked, allowing patients to receive prompt and accurate diagnosis and preventive measures.

[0017] The effects of the present invention are not limited to those mentioned above, and other effects not mentioned will be clearly understood by those skilled in the art from the following description. [Brief description of the drawings]

[0018] [Figure 1] FIG. 1 is a diagram illustrating an example of an examination environment for evaluating cognitive decline according to this embodiment. [Diagram 2] FIG. 2 is a block diagram for explaining a schematic configuration of the testing device for evaluating cognitive decline according to this embodiment. [Diagram 3] FIG. 3 is a block diagram showing a schematic configuration of the test management unit of the test device for evaluating cognitive decline in FIG. [Figure 4] FIG. 4 is a view showing an example of a screen provided to a user terminal for carrying out a test for evaluating cognitive decline according to this embodiment. [Diagram 5] 5a to 5s are views showing examples of screens provided to a user terminal for carrying out a test for evaluating cognitive decline according to this embodiment. [Figure 6] 6a to 6m are views showing examples of screens provided to a user terminal for carrying out a test for evaluating cognitive decline according to this embodiment. [Figure 7] 7a to 7h are views showing examples of screens provided to a user terminal for carrying out a test for evaluating cognitive decline according to this embodiment. [Figure 8] 8a to 8n are views showing examples of screens provided to a user terminal for carrying out a test for evaluating cognitive decline according to this embodiment. [Figure 9]9a to 9h are views showing examples of screens provided to a user terminal for carrying out a test for evaluating cognitive decline according to this embodiment. [Figure 10] 10a to 10j are views showing examples of screens provided to a user terminal for carrying out a test for evaluating cognitive decline according to this embodiment. [Figure 11] 11a to 11h are views showing examples of screens provided to a user terminal for carrying out a test for evaluating cognitive decline according to this embodiment. [Figure 12] 12a to 12g are views showing examples of screens provided to a user terminal for carrying out a test for evaluating cognitive decline according to this embodiment. [Figure 13] 13a to 13d are views showing examples of screens provided to a user terminal for carrying out a test for evaluating cognitive decline according to this embodiment. [Figure 14] 14a to 14o are views showing examples of screens provided to a user terminal for carrying out a test for evaluating cognitive decline according to this embodiment. [Figure 15] 15a to 15k are views showing examples of screens provided to a user terminal for carrying out a test for evaluating cognitive decline according to this embodiment. [Figure 16] FIG. 16 is a block diagram for explaining a schematic configuration of an examination device for evaluating cognitive decline according to another embodiment. [Figure 17] FIG. 17 is a flowchart for explaining the testing method for evaluating cognitive decline according to this embodiment. [Figure 18] FIG. 18 is a flowchart illustrating the testing method for evaluating cognitive decline according to this embodiment. [Figure 19] FIG. 19 is a flowchart illustrating the testing method for evaluating cognitive decline according to this embodiment. [Figure 20] FIG. 20 is a flowchart illustrating the testing method for evaluating cognitive decline according to this embodiment. DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE PREFERRED EMBODIMENTS

[0019] The advantages and features of the present invention, as well as the methods for achieving them, will become clear with reference to the embodiments described in detail with the accompanying drawings. However, the present invention is not limited to the embodiments presented below, and may be implemented in various different forms, and should be understood to include all modifications, equivalents, and alternatives within the spirit and technical scope of the present invention. The embodiments presented below are provided to fully disclose the present invention and to fully inform those skilled in the art to which the present invention pertains of the scope of the invention. In describing the present invention, if it is determined that a detailed description of related known technology may hinder the gist of the present invention, the detailed description will be omitted.

[0020] The terms used in this application are merely used to describe certain embodiments and are not intended to limit the present invention. A singular expression includes a plural expression unless the context clearly indicates otherwise. In this application, terms such as "comprise" or "have" specify the presence of features, numbers, steps, operations, components, parts, or combinations thereof described herein, and should be understood not to preclude the presence or additional possibility of one or more other features, numbers, steps, operations, components, parts, or combinations thereof. Terms such as first, second, etc. can be used to describe various components, but the components should not be limited by said terms. The terms are used only to distinguish one component from another.

[0021] Furthermore, in this application, a "module" can be a hardware component, such as a processor or a circuit, and / or a software component executed by a hardware component, such as a processor.

[0022] Hereinafter, an embodiment of the present invention will be described in detail with reference to the attached drawings. In the description with reference to the attached drawings, the same or corresponding components will be given the same drawing numbers, and duplicate descriptions thereof will be omitted.

[0023] 1 is an exemplary diagram of an examination environment for evaluating cognitive decline according to the present embodiment. Referring to FIG. 1, the examination environment 1 for evaluating cognitive decline may include an examination device 100 for evaluating cognitive decline (hereinafter, referred to as an examination device), a user terminal 200, and a network 300.

[0024] The inspection device 100 can execute an inspection process to inspect the degree to which the user accomplishes a mission presented for each of a plurality of inspection items and calculate an inspection score for each of the plurality of inspection items. In this embodiment, the inspection process can be expressed as an inspection step in the claims to be described later.

[0025] In this embodiment, the inspection device 100 can execute inspection processes including a first inspection process to an eleventh inspection process.

[0026] The first test process may include a process of performing a test for a first test item that evaluates how well a user can speak words corresponding to a predefined presentation category within a time limit (e.g., 30 seconds) and how well the user can draw a designated pattern within the time limit, and calculating a first test score. Here, the first test item may include a fluency test.

[0027] In this embodiment, the first inspection process may include a 1-1 inspection process and a 1-2 inspection process.

[0028] The 1-1 test process may include a process of performing a test for a 1-1 test item that evaluates how well a user speaks words corresponding to a predefined presentation category within a first time limit, and calculating a 1-1 test score. Here, the 1-1 test item may include a language fluency test. Thus, the 1-1 test process may include a process of performing a language fluency test on a user and calculating a 1-1 test score.

[0029] The 1-2 test process may include a process of performing a test for a 1-2 test item that evaluates how well the user is able to draw the designated design within a second time limit, and calculating a 1-2 test score. Here, the 1-2 test item may include a design fluency test. Thus, the 1-2 test process may include a process of performing a design fluency test on the user, and calculating a 1-2 test score.

[0030] The fluency test included in the first testing process according to the present embodiment may be different from a conventional fluency test in the following respects: The fluency test according to the present embodiment may record what the user speaks using a voice recognition technology and convert it into text in real time. Also, the text may be compared with a correct answer to calculate a test score. Among the fluency tests according to the present embodiment, the design fluency test may receive a result of the user dragging and connecting shapes on a screen provided to the user terminal 200.

[0031] The second test process can be executed after the execution of the first test process is completed. The second test process can include a process of: providing clues of a predetermined category to learn words; executing a test for a second test item that evaluates how well the learned words are remembered after a predetermined time (e.g., 20 minutes) has passed; and calculating a second test score. Here, the second test item can include a language clue memory test.

[0032] In this embodiment, the second inspection process may include a 2-1 inspection process and a 2-2 inspection process.

[0033] The 2-1 test process may include a process of executing a test for a 2-1 test item that evaluates the degree to which the ability to learn words is performed by providing clues of a predetermined category, and calculating a 2-1 test score. Here, the 2-1 test item may include a learning test of a language cue memory test. Thus, the 2-1 test process may include a process of executing a learning test of a language cue memory test for a user, and calculating a 2-1 test score.

[0034] The 2-2 inspection process can be executed after the execution of the 2-1 inspection process is completed and a predetermined time has elapsed. In this embodiment, other inspection processes can be executed from the time when the execution of the 2-1 inspection process is completed to the predetermined time. For example, instead of executing the 2-2 inspection process after the execution of the 2-1 inspection process is completed, the 2-2 inspection process can be executed only after the execution of the 2-1 inspection process is completed and the third to seventh inspection processes are executed.

[0035] The 2-2 test process may include a process of executing a test for a 2-2 test item that evaluates the degree to which the words learned in the 2-1 test process are remembered after a predetermined time has elapsed, and calculating a 2-2 test score. Here, the 2-2 test item may include a cue recall and a recognition test in the language cue memory test. Thus, the 2-2 test process may include a process of executing a cue recall and a recognition test in the language cue memory test for the user, and calculating a 2-2 test score.

[0036] In the language cue memory test included in the second testing process according to the present embodiment, short-term memory and long-term memory can be formed through the processes of 1) memorization or encoding, 2) storage and retention, and 3) recall. In addition, based on a detailed and comprehensive evaluation of the above three processes, memory evaluation including the presence or absence of short-term memory damage, the degree or characteristics of damage, etc. can be performed. The language cue memory test according to the present embodiment can accurately grasp memory function and ensure diagnostic value in evaluating the type of dementia. Here, being able to accurately grasp memory function includes grasping whether it is a problem of recall failure or a problem of memory strategy.

[0037] The difference between the language cue memory test included in the second testing process according to the present embodiment and a conventional language cue memory test can be as follows: The conventional language cue memory test is a test in which a plurality of words are called out and how many words can be recalled. However, the language cue memory test according to the present embodiment provides a cue to indicate the category to which the word belongs, and can ask questions while informing the subject of the category to which the word belongs during free recall.

[0038] Through the language cue memory test included in the second testing process according to the present embodiment, it is possible to evaluate normal and mild cognitive impairment, and normal and Alzheimer's dementia. The language cue memory test according to the present embodiment can show a significant correlation with the gray matter volume of the parahippocampus, a brain region related to the memory of illustrations. Therefore, the language cue memory test according to the present embodiment can accurately evaluate verbal memory ability in a short time.

[0039] The third test process can be executed after the execution of the 2-1 test process is completed. The third test process can include a process of learning a predetermined presented image, executing a test for a third test item that evaluates the degree to which the learned presented image is remembered after a predetermined time (e.g., 20 minutes) has passed, and calculating a third test score. Here, the third test item can include a visual schematic memory test.

[0040] In this embodiment, the third inspection process may include a 3-1 inspection process and a 3-2 inspection process.

[0041] The 3-1 test process may include a process of presenting a predetermined first presented image, performing a test for a 3-1 test item that inputs a visual perception stimulus through a process of grasping the number of colors in the first presented image, and calculating a 3-1 test score. Here, the 3-1 test item may include a learning test among visual schematic memory tests. Thus, the 3-1 test process may include a process of performing a learning test among visual schematic memory tests for a user, and calculating a 3-1 test score.

[0042] The 3-2 inspection process can be executed after the execution of the 3-1 inspection process is completed and a predetermined time has elapsed. In this embodiment, other inspection processes can be executed from the time when the execution of the 3-1 inspection process is completed to the predetermined time. For example, instead of executing the 3-2 inspection process after the execution of the 3-1 inspection process is completed, the 3-1 inspection process can be completed, the 4th inspection process to the 7th inspection process are executed, and then the 2-2 inspection process is executed, and then the 3-2 inspection process can be executed.

[0043] In this embodiment, the inspection processes can be executed as follows: First, the first inspection process is executed, then the second-first inspection process is executed, then the third-first inspection process is executed, then the fourth through seventh inspection processes are executed in sequence, then the second-second inspection process is executed, then the third-second inspection process is executed, then the eighth through eleventh inspection processes are executed in sequence.

[0044] In the present embodiment, the 2-2 inspection process and the 3-2 inspection process are necessarily executed after the 7th inspection process is completed, but the present invention is not limited to this. That is, the 2-2 inspection process and the 3-2 inspection process can be executed after any one of the 4th process to the 11th inspection process is completed.

[0045] The 3-2 test process may include a process of executing a test for a 3-2 test item that evaluates the degree to which the presented image learned in the 3-1 test process is remembered after a predetermined time has elapsed, and calculating a 3-2 test score. Here, the 3-2 test item may include a recognition test in the visual schematic memory test. Thus, the 3-2 test process may include a process of executing a recognition test in the visual schematic memory test for the user, and calculating a 3-2 test score.

[0046] The differences between the visual schematic memory test included in the third test process according to this embodiment and the conventional visual schematic memory test can be as follows. The visual schematic memory test according to this embodiment can eliminate interference from semantic memory by using abstract images that cannot be verbalized. In addition, the images can be configured as one set by varying the color, pattern, and degree of overlap. In addition, when performing a recognition test in the visual schematic memory test, an image included in the same set as the image learned can be presented as an interference image. In addition, by arbitrarily selecting and presenting an image from a set containing the same clue, the effect of learning to select a familiar image due to past test execution can be eliminated.

[0047] The fourth test process can be executed after the execution of the 3-1 test process is completed. The fourth test process can include a process of executing a test for a fourth test item that evaluates whether a predetermined presented word and a color of the predetermined presented word are accurately pronounced, and calculating a fourth test score. Here, the fourth test item can include a Stroop test.

[0048] In this embodiment, the fourth inspection process may include a 4-1 inspection process and a 4-2 inspection process.

[0049] The 4-1 test process may include a process of executing a test for a 4-1 test item that evaluates whether a predetermined word is correctly uttered, and calculating a 4-1 test score. Here, the 4-1 test item may include a first Stroop test. Thus, the 4-1 process may include a process of executing the first Stroop test on the user, and calculating a 4-1 test score.

[0050] The 4-2 test process may include a process of executing a test for a 4-2 test item that evaluates whether or not the color of a predetermined presented word is accurately pronounced, and calculating a 4-2 test score. Here, the 4-2 test item may include a second Stroop test. Thus, the 4-2 process may include a process of executing the second Stroop test on the user, and calculating a 4-2 test score.

[0051] The Stroop test included in the fourth test process according to the present embodiment is different from the conventional Stroop test in the following respects. The conventional Stroop test is a method of performing a test using a test paper, continuously reading out the presented words, and counting the number of words correctly read to calculate the test score. However, the Stroop test according to the present embodiment can include a word reading task in which the same word as the word with the color name written therein is selected, and a color reading task in which the word matching the color of the word is selected. The Stroop test according to the present embodiment can shorten the execution time in consideration of the time when a significant test result can be shown, and can evaluate the number of correct responses during the execution time.

[0052] The fifth inspection process may be executed after the fourth inspection process is completed. The fifth inspection process may include a process of executing an inspection for a fifth inspection item, which evaluates whether a line having a similar angle to a predetermined presented line is found, and calculating a fifth inspection score. Here, the fifth inspection item may include a line angle perception test. Thus, the fifth inspection process may include a process of executing a line angle perception test on a user and calculating a fifth inspection score.

[0053] The line angle perception test included in the fifth testing process according to the present embodiment may be different from a conventional line angle perception test in the following respects. The line angle perception test according to the present embodiment may be a test for finding a selected line corresponding to a presented line by comparing a pair of presented lines with a plurality of previously presented selected lines. The line angle perception test according to the present embodiment may evaluate the level of deterioration of spatiotemporal perception while reducing the angle (slope) difference between a pair of presented lines and a plurality of selected lines.

[0054] The sixth inspection process can be executed after the fifth inspection process is completed. The sixth inspection process can include a process of executing an inspection for a sixth inspection item that evaluates whether or not a figure with a color different from the color of a predetermined presented figure is found, and calculating a sixth inspection score. Here, the sixth inspection item can include a color perception inspection. Thus, the sixth inspection process can include a process of executing a color perception inspection on a user, and calculating a sixth inspection score.

[0055] The color perception test included in the sixth test process according to the present embodiment is different from the conventional color perception test in the following points. The Farnsworth Munsell 100 hue test, which is a conventional color perception test, arranges similar colors into four color regions based on the three attributes of color: hue, saturation, and brightness. The user checks whether or not they can distinguish the difference between colors by arranging the colors in the order based on the colors at both ends. Meanwhile, the color perception test according to the present embodiment can be configured by selecting colors based on the color system of green and blue series, considering that Parkinson's disease dementia patients have difficulty in distinguishing between blue and green. The color perception test according to the present embodiment can be configured by selecting two colors, rather than arranging all colors as in the conventional test, and making the difficulty level high for those with small color differences and low for those with large color differences.

[0056] The seventh inspection process may be executed after the sixth inspection process is completed. The seventh inspection process may execute an inspection for a seventh inspection item, which evaluates whether the size and weight of a given presented object are sorted in descending order, and calculate a seventh inspection score. Here, the seventh inspection item may include a size and weight inspection.

[0057] In this embodiment, the seventh inspection process may include a 7-1 inspection process and a 7-2 inspection process.

[0058] The 7-1 inspection process can execute an inspection for the 7-1 inspection item that evaluates whether or not to arrange the sizes of the predetermined presented objects in descending order, and calculate a 7-1 inspection score. Here, the 7-1 inspection item can include a size inspection. Thus, the 7-1 inspection process can include a process of executing a size inspection on the user as a target, and calculating a 7-1 inspection score.

[0059] The 7-2 inspection process can perform an inspection for the 7-2 inspection item, which evaluates whether the weights of the predetermined presented objects are arranged in descending order, and calculate a 7-2 inspection score. Here, the 7-2 inspection item can include a weight inspection. Thus, the 7-2 inspection process can include a process of performing a weight inspection on the user and calculating a 7-2 inspection score.

[0060] The size and weight test included in the seventh test process according to the present embodiment may be different from the conventional size and weight test in the following points. In the size and weight test according to the present embodiment, objects according to size and weight may be classified into a plurality of categories (e.g., five categories), and the difficulty level may be set to low / medium / high through a level classification between the categories. A combination between categories with a large difference in weight and size may be low in difficulty. A combination between categories with a small difference in weight and size may be high in difficulty. In addition, the test may be configured with easy questions in the beginning and difficult questions in the latter half. The image of the object may be a picture made of lines, and may be configured to clearly show the characteristics of the object (e.g., animal, object, etc.). In addition, the test may be configured to exclude objects that are unfamiliar to Korean elderly people.

[0061] The eighth test process can be executed after the execution of the 3-2 test process is completed. The eighth test process can include a process of executing a test for an eighth test item that evaluates whether or not the intensity of the emotion shown in the default face presentation image is recognized, and calculating an eighth test score. Here, the eighth test item can include a facial emotion test. Thus, the eighth test process can include a process of executing a facial emotion test on the user, and calculating an eighth test score.

[0062] The differences between the facial emotion test included in the eighth test process according to the present embodiment and the conventional facial emotion test can be as follows. In general, dementia patients may have emotion recognition disorders due to changes in cognitive function. In addition, dementia patients may experience difficulties in communicating emotions with others compared to healthy people, and may also have reduced empathy in interpersonal relationships. In particular, anterior temporal lobe dementia may show changes in interpersonal behavior, such as apathy, errors in social processing, and impaired social recognition. In addition, anterior temporal lobe dementia may have reduced facial emotion recognition compared to normal groups. Therefore, the facial emotion test according to the present embodiment provides a first face presentation image including six basic emotions (joy, fear, sadness, anger, disgust, surprise, etc.) and a second face presentation image that does not include emotions, i.e., is emotionless, and can confirm whether the patient is sensitive to the emotions included in each facial expression.

[0063] The ninth inspection process can be executed after the eighth inspection process is completed. The ninth inspection process can include a process of executing an inspection for a ninth inspection item for evaluating whether a predetermined presented paragraph is accurately spoken, and calculating a ninth inspection score. Here, the ninth inspection item can include a paragraph reading inspection. Thus, the ninth inspection process can include a process of executing a paragraph reading inspection for a user, and calculating a ninth inspection score.

[0064] The differences between the paragraph reading test included in the ninth test process according to the present embodiment and the conventional paragraph reading test may be as follows. Generally, primary progressive aphasia (PPA) may include a disease in which the decline of language function progresses gradually without other cognitive impairment. PPA may be classified into progressive non-fluent aphasia, semantic dementia, and logopenic variant primary progressive aphasia according to symptoms. Patients with progressive non-fluent aphasia know the meaning of words but have difficulty speaking on their own, make many grammatical errors, and may have phonological paraphasia or stuttering when saying words. Patients with semantic dementia may maintain relatively good fluency in words, but may have no concept of words or things, and may have severe impairment in saying words from the beginning. Patients with logopenic progressive aphasia have relatively well-preserved language comprehension and fluency, but may have difficulty naming objects, exhibit slow speech rate, and show impairment in comprehending and imitating longer sentences.

[0065] The paragraph reading test according to the present embodiment can construct a standardized paragraph with the frequency of each character adjusted to form a phonetically balanced sentence. Also, the content of the paragraph can be constructed to be familiar to the elderly. The paragraph reading test according to the present embodiment can record the spoken content and measure the speaking speed. Also, the paragraph reading test according to the present embodiment can evaluate the reading ability by checking the phonological processing ability such as phonological substitution, omission, addition, and synthesis using a voice recognition technology. The paragraph reading test according to the present embodiment can extract errors from the spoken text and calculate a test score, and can analyze the recorded spoken voice to evaluate the speaking speed, the length of pauses, the pitch of the voice, and the like.

[0066] The tenth test process can be executed after the ninth test process is completed. The tenth test process can execute a test for a tenth test item for evaluating whether or not the position and order of the predetermined presented figures are memorized, and calculate a tenth test score. Here, the tenth test item can include a spatiotemporal attention test.

[0067] In this embodiment, the tenth inspection process may include a 10-1 inspection process and a 10-2 inspection process.

[0068] The 10-1 test process can execute a test for a 10-1 test item that evaluates whether the user can sequentially remember the positions and order in which predetermined presentation figures appear in a predetermined area, and calculate a 10-1 test score. Here, the 10-1 test item can include a first spatiotemporal attention test. Thus, the 10-1 test process can include a process of executing a first spatiotemporal attention test on a user and calculating a 10-1 test score.

[0069] The 10-2 test process can execute a test for a 10-2 test item that evaluates whether the user can remember the position and order in which a predetermined presentation figure appears in a predetermined area in reverse, and calculate a 10-2 test score. Here, the 10-2 test item can include a second spatiotemporal attention test. Thus, the 10-2 test process can include a process of executing a second spatiotemporal attention test on the user and calculating a 10-2 test score.

[0070] The differences between the spatiotemporal attention test included in the tenth testing process according to the present embodiment and the conventional spatiotemporal attention test may be as follows. The spatiotemporal attention test according to the present embodiment may include a test for evaluating working memory, particularly spatial working memory, among the executive function domains. The spatiotemporal attention test according to the present embodiment may measure attention by having the subject memorize the positions and order in which figures are presented and repeatedly input the positions of the figures in sequence. In addition, the spatiotemporal attention test according to the present embodiment may measure working memory by having the subject repeatedly input the positions of the figures in reverse. The number of figures presented in the spatiotemporal attention test according to the present embodiment is increased, and the number of times the user successfully memorizes the positions and the order may become the memory range. The spatiotemporal attention test according to the present embodiment may automatically record the test results, and may be stopped if the input is unsuccessful. The spatiotemporal attention test according to the present embodiment may measure the reaction time for selecting a figure to evaluate the reaction speed.

[0071] The eleventh test process may be executed after the tenth test process is completed. The eleventh test process may execute a test for an eleventh test item that evaluates whether a word corresponding to a condition is correctly selected so that a predefined presented incomplete sentence becomes a completed sentence, and may calculate an eleventh test score. Here, the eleventh test item may include a Hayling test.

[0072] In this embodiment, the eleventh inspection process may include an 11-1 inspection process and an 11-2 inspection process.

[0073] The 11-1 test process can perform a test on the 11-1 test item that evaluates whether or not an accurate word is selected so that a predefined incomplete sentence is completed, and calculate the 11-1 test score. Here, the 11-1 test item can include a first Hayling test. Thus, the 11-1 test process can include a process of performing the first Hayling test on the user and calculating the 11-1 test score.

[0074] The 11-2 inspection process can perform an inspection for an 11-2 inspection item that evaluates whether or not an unnatural word is selected so that a predefined presented incomplete sentence becomes a completed sentence, and calculate an 11-2 inspection score. Here, the 11-2 inspection item can include a second Hayling inspection. Thus, the 11-2 inspection process can include a process of performing a second Hayling inspection on a user and calculating an 11-2 inspection score.

[0075] The Hayling test included in the eleventh test process according to this embodiment differs from the conventional Hayling test in the following points. The conventional Hayling test is a test in which the subject recalls and speaks words so as to form natural or unnatural sentences. However, the Hayling test according to this embodiment presents words suitable for a condition and unnatural words (incorrect words) and allows the subject to select one of them. The Hayling test according to this embodiment can measure language inhibition by shortening the time it takes to recall words. The Hayling test according to this embodiment automatically calculates a test score and can compare responses under the automatic condition (natural word selection) and the inhibition condition (unnatural word selection).

[0076] After completing the first to eleventh test processes, the test device 100 can execute a categorization process for classifying at least one of the test items into one of the neurocognitive categories. In this embodiment, the categorization process can be expressed as a categorization step in the claims to be described later.

[0077] The testing device 100 can classify the second test item (verbal cue memory test) and the third test item (visual schematic memory test) into a first neurocognitive category that can evaluate cognitive decline relative to memory ability.

[0078] The testing device 100 can classify the eighth test item (facial emotion test) into the second neurocognitive category that can distinguish neurocognitive disorders in social cognition. Here, the second neurocognitive category is a new category added to the test for evaluating cognitive decline according to the present embodiment.

[0079] The testing device 100 can classify the seventh test item (size and weight test) and the ninth test item (paragraph reading test) into the third neurocognitive category that can evaluate cognitive function decline for language.

[0080] The testing device 100 can classify the fifth test item (line angle perception test) and the sixth test item (color perception test) into a fourth neurocognitive category that can evaluate cognitive function decline for perception.

[0081] The testing device 100 can classify the first test item (fluency test), the fourth test item (Stroop test), the tenth test item (spatial-temporal attention test), and the eleventh test item (Hayling test) into the fifth neurocognitive category, which can evaluate cognitive function decline related to attention execution.

[0082] After completing the execution of the category classification process, the testing device 100 can execute an evaluation process for evaluating whether or not there is cognitive decline in the neurocognitive category based on the test scores for the test items classified into the neurocognitive category. In this embodiment, the evaluation process can be expressed as an evaluation step in the claims to be described later.

[0083] The testing device 100 can perform a first evaluation process to evaluate whether or not there is cognitive decline for a first neurocognitive category, such as memory, based on the second test score (verbal cue memory test score) and the third test score (visual schematic memory test score).

[0084] The testing device 100 can perform a second evaluation process to evaluate whether or not there is cognitive impairment for a second neurocognitive category as social cognition based on the eighth test score (facial emotion test score).

[0085] The testing device 100 can perform a third evaluation process to evaluate whether there is cognitive function decline for the third neurocognitive category, namely language, based on the seventh test score (size and weight test score) and the ninth test score (paragraph reading test score).

[0086] The testing device 100 can perform a fourth evaluation process to evaluate whether there is cognitive impairment for a fourth neurocognitive category as perception based on the fifth test score (line angle perception test score) and the sixth test score (color perception test score).

[0087] The testing device 100 can perform a fifth evaluation process to evaluate whether or not there is cognitive impairment for the fifth neurocognitive category as attention executive based on the first test score (fluency test score), the fourth test score (Stroop test score), the tenth test score (spatial-temporal attention test score) and the eleventh test score (Hayling test score).

[0088] In this embodiment, the testing device 100 may exist independently in the form of a server, or the testing function for evaluating cognitive decline provided by the testing device 100 may be implemented in the form of an application and installed in the user terminal 200.

[0089] The user terminal 200 can access a test application for evaluating cognitive decline and / or a test site for evaluating cognitive decline provided by the test device 100, and can receive a test service for evaluating cognitive decline. Here, the user terminal 200 can include a terminal provided by a user who takes the test, i.e., a subject.

[0090] Such a user terminal 200 may include a communication terminal capable of performing the functions of a computing device (not shown), and may be, but is not limited to, a desktop computer 201, a smartphone 202, a notebook computer 203 operated by a user, a tablet PC, a smart TV, a mobile phone, a personal digital assistant (PDA), a media player, a microserver, a global positioning system (GPS) device, an e-book reader, a digital broadcasting terminal, a navigation system, a kiosk, an MP3 player, a digital camera, a home appliance, and other mobile or non-mobile computing devices. In addition, the user terminal 200 may be a wearable terminal such as a watch, glasses, a hair band, and a ring having a communication function and a data processing function. Such a user terminal 200 is not limited to the above, and any terminal capable of web browsing may be borrowed without restriction.

[0091] The network 300 can serve to connect the inspection device 100 and the user terminal 200. Such a network 300 can include, for example, wired networks such as a local area network (LAN), a wide area network (WAN), a metropolitan area network (MAN), and an integrated service digital network (ISDN), and wireless networks such as a wireless LAN (WLAN), code-division multiple access (CDMA), and satellite communication, but the scope of the present invention is not limited thereto. In addition, the network 300 can transmit and receive information using short-range communication and / or long-range communication. Here, the short-range communication may include Bluetooth, RFID (radio frequency identification), IrDA (infrared data association), UWB (ultra-wideband), ZigBee, and Wi-Fi technologies, and the long-range communication may include CDMA (code-division multiple access), FDMA (frequency-division multiple access), TDMA (time-division multiple access), OFDMA (orthogonal frequency-division multiple access), and SC-FDMA (single carrier frequency-division multiple access) technologies.

[0092] Network 300 may include connections of network elements such as hubs, bridges, routers, switches, etc. Network 300 may include one or more connected networks, e.g., multiple network environments, including a public network, such as the Internet, and a private network, such as a secure corporate private network. Access to network 300 may be provided via one or more wired or wireless access networks.

[0093] Further, the network 300 may support CAN (controller area network) communication, V2I (vehicle to infrastructure) communication, V2X (vehicle to everything) communication, WAVE (wireless access in vehicular environment) communication technology, and an IoT (Internet of Things) network that exchanges and processes information between distributed components such as things and / or 5G communication.

[0094] 2 is a block diagram for explaining the configuration of a test device for evaluating cognitive decline according to the present embodiment. In the following description, the description of parts that overlap with the description of FIG. 1 will be omitted. Referring to FIG. 2, the test device 100 can include a communication unit 110, a storage medium 120, a program storage unit 130, a database 140, a test management unit 150, and a control unit 160.

[0095] The communication unit 110 may provide a communication interface required for providing a transmission / reception signal between the inspection device 100 and the user terminal 200 in the form of packet data in cooperation with the network 300. Furthermore, the communication unit 110 may play a role of transmitting request information of the inspection management unit 150 to the user terminal 200 and receiving response information of the user terminal 200. Here, the communication network is a medium that plays a role of connecting the inspection device 100 and the user terminal 200, and may include a path that provides a connection path so that the user terminal 200 can transmit and receive information after connecting to the inspection device 100. Furthermore, the communication unit 110 may be a device including hardware and software required for transmitting and receiving signals such as control signals or data signals to and from other network devices via wired or wireless connections.

[0096] The storage medium 120 performs a function of temporarily or permanently storing data processed by the control unit 160. Here, the storage medium 120 may include a magnetic storage medium or a flash storage medium, but the scope of the present invention is not limited thereto. Such a storage medium 120 may include an internal memory and / or an external memory, and may include a volatile memory such as a DRAM, an SRAM, or an SDRAM, a non-volatile memory such as an OTPROM (one time programmable ROM), a PROM, an EPROM, an EEPROM, a mask ROM, a flash ROM, a NAND flash memory, or a NOR flash memory, a flash drive such as an SSD, a compact flash (CF) card, an SD card, a Micro-SD card, a Mini-SD card, an Xd card, or a memory stick, or a storage device such as an HDD.

[0097] The program memory unit 130 is equipped with control software that performs operations such as executing a testing process to test the degree to which the user performs missions presented for each of a plurality of test items and calculate a test score for each of the plurality of test items, executing a category classification process to classify at least one of the plurality of test items into one of a plurality of neurocognitive categories, and executing an evaluation process to evaluate whether or not there is a cognitive decline in the neurocognitive category based on the test scores for the test items classified into the neurocognitive category.

[0098] The database 140 may include a management database that stores test information for evaluating cognitive decline. For example, the management database may store information on the first to eleventh test processes, information on the first to fifth neurocognitive category classification processes, information on the first to fifth evaluation processes, information on the process of evaluating Alzheimer's disease dementia, information on the process of evaluating anterior temporal lobe dementia, and information on the process of evaluating Parkinson's disease dementia and Lewy body dementia.

[0099] In addition, the management database may store correct answers corresponding to the instructions, which will be described later. For example, the management database may store a correct answer text corresponding to the 1-1 instruction, a correct answer order corresponding to the 1-2 instruction, a correct answer word corresponding to the 2-1-1 instruction, a correct answer text corresponding to the 2-1-2 instruction, a correct answer text corresponding to the 2-2-1 instruction, a correct answer word corresponding to the 2-2-2 instruction, a correct answer corresponding to the 3-1 instruction, a correct answer corresponding to the 3-2 instruction, a correct answer corresponding to the 4-1 instruction and the 4-2 instruction, a correct answer line corresponding to the 5th instruction, a correct answer corresponding to the 6th instruction, a correct answer corresponding to the 7-1 instruction and the 7-2 instruction, a correct answer corresponding to the 8th instruction, a correct phrase number corresponding to the 9th instruction, a correct answer corresponding to the 10-1 instruction and the 10-2 instruction, and a correct answer corresponding to the 11-1 instruction and the 11-2 instruction.

[0100] The management database may also store a method for calculating the test score. In this embodiment, the test score may be calculated by comparing a series of inputs received from the user terminal 200 in response to the instruction text with the correct answers and counting the number of incorrect answers relative to the total number of correct answers. Here, the more incorrect answers there are, the lower the test score may be, and vice versa.

[0101] In the present embodiment, the inspection score may vary depending on the count result of the required time, which will be described later. For example, if the count result of the required time exceeds a time limit, the inspection score may be further reduced.

[0102] In addition, the management database may store a reference score for evaluating cognitive decline. Here, the calculation process of the reference score may be described as follows.

[0103] In the first step, the first to eleventh test processes may be performed on the normal group. Here, the normal group is a group of healthy individuals without cognitive impairment, and may be classified differently according to gender / educational background / age. As a result of performing the first to eleventh test processes on the normal group, the first to eleventh test scores of the normal group may be calculated.

[0104] In the second process, first to eleventh average values ​​and first to eleventh standard deviations can be calculated for the first to eleventh test scores of the normal group.

[0105] In the third step, at least one of the first to eleventh test items for the normal group can be classified into one of the first to fifth neurocognitive categories. The second and third test items for the normal group can be classified into the first neurocognitive category, the eighth test item for the normal group can be classified into the second neurocognitive category, the seventh and ninth test items for the normal group can be classified into the third neurocognitive category, the fifth and sixth test items for the normal group can be classified into the fourth neurocognitive category, and the first, fourth, tenth, and eleventh test items for the normal group can be classified into the fifth neurocognitive category.

[0106] In the fourth step, the first to eleventh Z-scores can be calculated using the first to eleventh average values ​​and the first to eleventh standard deviations for the first to eleventh test scores. Here, the Z-scores can be said to be scores that indicate how far the test scores are from the average value when viewed in units of standard deviation.

[0107] In this embodiment, if the Z-score is equal to or less than the first standard deviation (e.g., -1.5 SD), it can be evaluated that there is cognitive decline in the neurocognitive category in which the test item is included. Thus, the reference score can be said to be the test score of a normal group in which the Z-score is equal to the first standard deviation (e.g., -1.5 SD). In this embodiment, the reference score can include the first to eleventh reference scores. In this embodiment, the Z-score can also include the first to eleventh Z-scores.

[0108] In an alternative embodiment, the reference score may be expressed as a standard cutoff score. Here, the standard cutoff score may be the test score of a normal group whose Z-score is the first standard deviation (e.g., -1.5 SD). In this embodiment, the standard cutoff score may include cutoff scores of the first to eleventh standards.

[0109] In this embodiment, the reference score may be updated periodically. Each time the user executes a test application for evaluating cognitive decline via the user terminal 200 or accesses a test site for evaluating cognitive decline in order to perform a test for evaluating cognitive decline, the reference score may be updated in real time.

[0110] The database 140 may also include a user database that stores information about a user who receives a test service for evaluating cognitive decline. Here, the user information may include unique information about the user, such as the user's name, affiliation, status, sex, age, educational background, contact information, email, address, image, etc., information about user authentication (login), such as ID (or email) and password, connection country, connection location, information about the device used for connection, connection information, such as the connected network environment, etc.

[0111] The user database may also store user information, information and / or category history provided by a user who accessed a test application for assessing cognitive decline or a test site for assessing cognitive decline, configuration information set by the user, resource usage information used by the user, and billing and payment information corresponding to the user's resource usage.

[0112] The test management unit 150 can execute a test process to test the user to see how well the user accomplishes the missions presented for each of a plurality of test items, and to calculate a test score for each of the plurality of test items.

[0113] After the execution of the test process is completed, the test management unit 150 can execute a category classification process to classify at least one test item among the multiple test items into any one of multiple neurocognitive categories.

[0114] After completing the execution of the category classification process, the test management unit 150 can execute an evaluation process to evaluate whether or not there is cognitive decline in the neurocognitive category based on the test scores for the test items classified into the neurocognitive category.

[0115] After completing the execution of the evaluation process, the test management unit 150 can transmit the evaluation result to the user terminal 200 and / or a terminal (not shown) of a medical practitioner (eg, a doctor).

[0116] The control unit 160 can control the operation of the entire inspection apparatus 100 using the control software installed in the program storage unit 130 as a kind of central processing unit. The control unit 160 can include any kind of device capable of processing data, such as a processor. Here, the term "processor" may refer to a data processing device built into hardware having a circuit physically structured to execute a function represented by a code or instruction included in a program. Examples of such data processing devices built into hardware include processing devices such as a microprocessor, a central processing unit (CPU), a processor core, a multiprocessor, an application-specific integrated circuit (ASIC), and a field programmable gate array (FPGA), but the scope of the present invention is not limited thereto.

[0117] Fig. 3 is a block diagram for explaining the configuration of the test management unit of the test device for evaluating cognitive decline in Fig. 2, and Figs. 4 to 15 are exemplary views of screens provided to a user terminal for carrying out a test for evaluating cognitive decline according to this embodiment. In the following description, the description of parts overlapping with the description of Figs. 1 and 2 will be omitted. With reference to Figs. 3 to 15, the test management unit 150 according to this embodiment can include a providing unit 151, a first processing unit 152, a second processing unit 153, a third processing unit 154, and a transmitting unit 155.

[0118] The providing unit 151 can provide various information for the test to the user terminal 200 that has accessed a test application for evaluating cognitive decline and / or a test site for evaluating cognitive decline. It can be said that the figures shown in Figs. 4 to 15 below are screens output to the user terminal 200 by the processing of the providing unit 151.

[0119] FIG. 4 is an exemplary diagram of a first screen provided by the providing unit 151 to the user terminal 200 to perform a test for evaluating cognitive decline. Referring to FIG. 4, the first screen may include an icon and text representing the test. As an embodiment, the providing unit 151 may provide the user terminal 200 with an icon and text (first test) representing the first test for the first test process. Here, the first test expressed in text is an abbreviation of the first test process, and may be provided simply and clearly in consideration of elderly people. In this manner, the providing unit 151 may provide the user terminal 200 with icons and text representing the second test to the eleventh test for the second test process to the eleventh test process.

[0120] The data processed by the first processing unit 152 to the third processing unit 154 can be provided to the user terminal 200 by the providing unit 151. In particular, the series of data provided by the first processing unit 152 is actually provided by the providing unit 151, but for convenience of explanation, it will be assumed that the series of data is provided by the first processing unit 152.

[0121] The first processing unit 152 can execute the first inspection process including the 1-1 inspection process and the 1-2 inspection process. In this embodiment, the first processing unit 152 can execute the first inspection process multiple times except for the practice inspection.

[0122] When performing the 1-1 inspection process, the first processing unit 152 can provide the user terminal 200 with a 1-1 instruction sentence that causes the user terminal 200 to speak one or more words that correspond to a predefined presentation category within a first time limit.

[0123] The first processing unit 152 can receive from the user terminal 200 a speech result for one or more words corresponding to the 1-1 instruction sentence and falling into a predefined presentation category, and convert the result into a speech text.

[0124] The first processing unit 152 may compare the spoken text with the correct answer text to calculate the 1-1 check score. In the present embodiment, the 1-1 check score may be calculated to be higher as the number of spoken texts that are found to be correct with respect to the total number of times the 1-1 check process is performed increases.

[0125] In this embodiment, before executing the 1-1 inspection process, the first processing unit 152 can provide the user terminal 200 with a text of how to execute the 1-1 inspection process, and allow the user terminal 200 to execute a practice inspection for the 1-1 inspection process.

[0126] The first processing unit 152 can execute the 1-2 inspection process after completing the execution of the 1-1 inspection process.

[0127] When executing the 1-2 inspection process, the first processing unit 152 can provide the user terminal 200 with a 1-2 instruction sentence to connect at least two or more of the multiple figures to draw one or more designs within a second time limit.

[0128] The first processing unit 152 can receive and store the order in which at least two or more shapes among a plurality of shapes are drawn and connected in response to the 1-2 instruction sentence from the user terminal 200.

[0129] The first processing unit 152 may compare the drawing and connecting sequence with the correct sequence to calculate the 1-2 inspection score. In the present embodiment, the 1-2 inspection score may be calculated to be higher as the number of drawing connection sequences that are found to be correct with respect to the total number of times the 1-2 inspection process is performed increases.

[0130] In this embodiment, before executing the 1-2 inspection process, the first processing unit 152 can provide the user terminal 200 with a text of how to execute the 1-2 inspection process, and allow the user terminal 200 to execute a practice inspection for the 1-2 inspection process.

[0131] As an alternative embodiment, the first processing unit 152 may calculate the first test score by adding up the 1-1 test score and the 1-2 test score. Alternatively, the first processing unit 152 may use each of the 1-1 test score and the 1-2 test score when evaluating cognitive decline, without adding up the 1-1 test score and the 1-2 test score. In this embodiment, when the first test score is higher than the cutoff score of the first criterion, the fluency may be evaluated as good, and when the first test score is lower than the cutoff score of the first criterion, the fluency may be evaluated as decreased.

[0132] 5a to 5s are exemplary views of screens provided to the user terminal 200 for executing the first inspection process. In this embodiment, Figs. 5a to 5h are exemplary views of screens explaining the 1-1 inspection process, and Figs. 5i to 5s are exemplary views of screens explaining the 1-2 inspection process.

[0133] 5a shows the start screen of the 1-1 inspection process. When the input of the start button 501 is received, the next screen can be switched to.

[0134] 5b shows a screen that provides a text of how to execute the 1-1 inspection process and notifies the start of a practice inspection process (1-1 practice inspection process) for the 1-1 inspection process. When the practice start button 502 is pressed, the screen can be switched to the next screen.

[0135] 5c shows a screen for executing the 1-1 practice test process. After checking the 1-1 practice instruction sentence, the user can input the microphone button 503 and speak words while watching the progress bar 504. In this embodiment, the progress bar 504 can perform one or more of the following functions: counting the time limit and indicating the progress of the work.

[0136] 5d shows a screen notifying the user to re-run the 1-1 practice test process. If the user does not press the microphone button 503, if the number of words spoken is less than a predetermined number (e.g., 3), or if the speaking volume is low, the 1-1 practice test process can be re-run.

[0137] FIG. 5e shows a screen notifying the user that the 1-1 practice test process has been completed and that the actual test will now be performed.

[0138] 5f shows a screen informing the user of the 1-1 instruction sentence and the start of the 1-1 inspection process. When the start button 505 is pressed, the user can switch to the next screen.

[0139] 5g shows a screen for executing the 1-1 inspection process. After the user confirms the 1-1 instruction sentence, the user can press the microphone button 506 and speak a word corresponding to the 1-1 instruction sentence while watching the progress bar 507.

[0140] FIG. 5h shows a screen notifying the completion of the 1-1 inspection process and the start of the next inspection process.

[0141] 5i shows the start screen of the 1-2 inspection process. When the input of the start button 508 is received, it is possible to switch to the next screen.

[0142] 5j shows a screen providing text on how to perform the 1-2 inspection process. For example, the 1-2 inspection process may include text on how to connect dots that appear on the screen to draw as many different pictures as possible.

[0143] 5k shows a screen notifying the start of a practice test process (first-2 practice test process) for the first-2 test process. When the practice start button 509 is input, the screen can be switched to the next screen.

[0144] Figures 5l, 5m and 5n show screens for executing the 1-2 practice inspection process. After the user confirms the 1-2 practice instruction text, he or she can draw the same pattern as the left area in the right area. When the user has completed drawing the pattern and pressed the confirmation button 510, 511, 512, the screen can be switched to the next screen. Figures 5l, 5m and 5n may further include a progress bar (not shown).

[0145] 5o shows a screen for informing the user to retry the 1-2 practice test process. If the user is unable to start drawing the pattern within the time limit or if the result of the 1-2 practice test process is incorrect, the 1-2 practice test process can be retried.

[0146] FIG. 5p shows a screen notifying the user that the 1-2 practice test process has been completed and that the actual test will now be performed.

[0147] FIG. 5q shows a screen informing the user of the time limits that apply when performing the 1-2 inspection process.

[0148] Fig. 5r shows a screen for executing the 1-2 inspection process. After checking the 1-2 instruction sentence, the user can press the start button 513 and draw the same design as in the left area in the right area while watching the progress bar 514. When the design drawing is completed and the confirm button 515 is input, the screen can be switched to the next screen.

[0149] FIG. 5S shows a screen notifying the completion of the 1-2 inspection process and the start of the next inspection process.

[0150] 3, the first processing unit 152 can execute the second inspection process including the 2-1 inspection process and the 2-2 inspection process. In this embodiment, the first processing unit 152 can execute the second inspection process multiple times.

[0151] When executing the 2-1 inspection process, the first processing unit 152 can provide the user terminal 200 with a 2-1-1 instruction sentence that displays a plurality of presented words and prompts the user to select a word from the plurality of presented words that corresponds to a clue for a predefined category.

[0152] The first processing unit 152 can receive a word selection result in which one of a plurality of presented words is selected in response to the 2-1-1 instruction sentence from the user terminal 200.

[0153] The first processing unit 152 may compare the word selection results with the correct words to calculate the 2-1-1 check score. In this embodiment, the 2-1-1 check score may be calculated to be higher as the number of word selection results that are found to be correct with respect to the total number of times the 2-1-1 process is executed increases.

[0154] The first processing unit 152 can provide the user terminal 200 with a 2-1-2 instruction sentence that does not provide options for the multiple presented words, but causes the user terminal 200 to reproduce and speak a word that belongs to a clue in a predefined category from among the multiple presented words previously shown.

[0155] The first processing unit 152 can receive from the user terminal 200 the spoken result of words belonging to clues of a predefined category in response to the 2-1-2 instruction sentence.

[0156] The first processing unit 152 can convert the speech result into a speech text, and calculate the 2-1-2 check score by comparing the speech text with the correct answer text. In this embodiment, the 2-1-2 check score can be calculated to be higher as the number of speech texts that are found to be correct relative to the total number of times the 2-1-2 process is executed increases.

[0157] In this embodiment, the first processing unit 152 can provide the user terminal 200 with a text of how to execute the 2-1 inspection process before executing the 2-1 inspection process.

[0158] The first processing unit 152 can execute the 2-2 inspection process after the execution of the 2-1 inspection process is completed and a predetermined time has elapsed.

[0159] When executing the 2-2 inspection process, the first processing unit 152 can provide the user terminal 200 with a 2-2-1 instruction sentence that causes the user terminal 200 to play and speak a presented word that corresponds to a clue to the category among the multiple presented words shown in the 2-1 inspection step.

[0160] The first processing unit 152 can receive from the user terminal 200, in response to the 2-2-1 instruction sentence, a speech result for a presented word corresponding to a clue of the category among a plurality of presented words seen when the 2-1 test step is executed.

[0161] The first processing unit 152 can convert the speech result into a speech text, and calculate the 2-2-1 check score by comparing the speech text with the correct answer text. In this embodiment, the 2-2-1 check score can be calculated to be higher as the number of speech texts that are found to be correct relative to the total number of times the 2-2-1 process is executed increases.

[0162] The first processing unit 152 can provide the user terminal 200 with a 2-2-2 instruction sentence that allows the user to select whether the predefined presented word is a word seen in a previous test, together with the predefined presented word.

[0163] The first processing unit 152 may calculate a 2-2-2 test score by comparing a result of selecting whether a predefined presented word is a word seen in a previous test in response to the 2-2-2 instruction sentence with a correct word. In this embodiment, the 2-2-2 test score may be calculated to be higher as the number of selection results that are found to be correct with respect to the total number of times the 2-2-2 process is executed increases.

[0164] In this embodiment, the first processing unit 152 can provide the user terminal 200 with a text of how to execute the 2-2 inspection process before executing the 2-2 inspection process.

[0165] As an alternative embodiment, the first processing unit 152 may calculate the second test score by adding up one or more of the 2-1-1 test score, the 2-1-2 test score, the 2-2-1 test score, and the 2-2-2 test score. The first processing unit 152 may not add up the 2-1-1 test score, the 2-1-2 test score, the 2-2-1 test score, and the 2-2-2 test score, but may use each of the 2-1-1 test score, the 2-1-2 test score, the 2-2-1 test score, and the 2-2-2 test score when evaluating cognitive decline. In this embodiment, if the second test score is higher than the cutoff score of the second criterion, it may be evaluated that the verbal memory is good, and if the second test score is lower than the cutoff score of the second criterion, it may be evaluated that the verbal memory is deteriorated.

[0166] 6a to 6m are exemplary views of screens provided to the user terminal 200 for executing the second inspection process. Fig. 6a to Fig. 6f are exemplary views of screens explaining the 2-1 inspection process, and Fig. 6g to Fig. 6m are exemplary views of screens explaining the 2-2 inspection process.

[0167] 6a shows the start screen of the 2-1 inspection process. When the input of the start button 601 is received, the next screen can be switched to.

[0168] 6b shows a screen that provides a text of how to execute the 2-1 inspection process and notifies the start of the 2-1 inspection process. When the start button 602 is pressed, the next screen can be displayed.

[0169] 6c shows a screen for executing a part of the 2-1 inspection process. After confirming the 2-1-1 instruction sentence, the user can select one of the multiple presented words while watching the progress bar 603.

[0170] FIG. 6d shows a screen informing a user of an invitation to play back the multiple presented words shown in FIG. 6c.

[0171] 6e shows a screen for executing the remainder of the 2-1 inspection process. After confirming the 2-1-2 instruction sentence, the user can press the microphone button 604 and, while watching the progress bar 605, reproduce and speak the word that belongs to the clue of the predetermined category among the multiple presented words shown previously.

[0172] FIG. 6f shows a screen notifying the completion of the 2-1st inspection process and the start of the next inspection process.

[0173] 6g shows the start screen of the 2-2 inspection process. When the input of the start button 606 is received, the next screen can be switched to. Here, the start screen of the 2-2 inspection processor can be provided to the user terminal 200 after the execution of the seventh inspection process is completed.

[0174] 6h shows a screen that provides text on how to perform a portion of the 2-2 inspection process and notifies the start of a portion of the 2-2 inspection process. When the start button 607 is pressed, the next screen can be displayed.

[0175] 6i shows a screen for executing a part of the 2-2 inspection process. After checking the 2-2-1 instruction sentence, the user can input the microphone button 608 and, while watching the progress bar 609, reproduce and speak a word that belongs to a clue of a predetermined category among the multiple presented words shown previously.

[0176] 6j shows a screen informing the user that a part of the 2-2 inspection process has been completed and that the remaining part of the 2-2 inspection process is to be executed. When the start button 610 is pressed, the user can switch to the next screen.

[0177] 6k shows a screen that provides text on how to perform the remainder of the 2-2 inspection process and indicates the start of the remainder of the 2-2 inspection process. When the start button 611 is pressed, the next screen can be displayed.

[0178] 6l shows the screen for carrying out the remainder of the 2-2 inspection process. After confirming the 2-2-2 instruction text, the user can select one of the "Yes" button 613 and the "No" button 614 while viewing the progress bar 612.

[0179] FIG. 6m shows a screen notifying the completion of the 2-2 inspection process and the start of the next inspection process.

[0180] 3, the first processing unit 152 can execute a third inspection process including a 3-1 inspection process and a 3-2 inspection process. In this embodiment, the first processing unit 152 can execute the third inspection process multiple times.

[0181] When executing the 3-1 inspection process, the first processing unit 152 can provide the user terminal 200 with a 3-1 instruction sentence that shows a default first presentation image and allows the user terminal 200 to select whether or not the number of colors in the default first presentation image is equal to or greater than a default number.

[0182] The first processing unit 152 can receive from the user terminal 200 a selection result of whether the number of colors in the predetermined first presentation image is equal to or greater than a predetermined number in response to the 3-1 instruction sentence, and can compare the selection result with the correct answer to calculate a 3-1 inspection score. In this embodiment, the 3-1 inspection score can be calculated to be higher as the number of selection results that are found to be correct out of the total number of times the 3-1 inspection process is performed increases.

[0183] In this embodiment, the first processing unit 152 can provide the user terminal 200 with a text of how to execute the 3-1 inspection process before executing the 3-1 inspection process.

[0184] The first processing unit 152 can execute the 3-2 inspection process after the execution of the 3-1 inspection process is completed and a predetermined time has elapsed.

[0185] When executing the 3-2 inspection process, the first processing unit 152 can display a default second presentation image and provide the user terminal 200 with a 3-2 instruction sentence that allows the user to select whether or not the default second presentation image is the same as the previously displayed default first presentation image.

[0186] The first processing unit 152 can receive from the user terminal 200 the result of a selection as to whether or not the default second image is the same as the default first presentation image previously shown in response to the 3-2 instruction sentence, and compare the selection result with the correct answer.

[0187] The first processing unit 152 can count a first time duration from the time when the 3-2 instruction sentence is provided to the time when it is selected whether the default second image is the same as the previously shown default first presentation image.

[0188] The first processing unit 152 can calculate the 3-2 inspection score by reflecting the result of the comparison and the result of counting the first required time. In this embodiment, the 3-2 inspection score can be calculated differently depending on the number of selection results that are found to be correct and the result of counting the first required time with respect to the total number of times the 3-2 inspection process is performed. Even if there are many selection results that are found to be correct with respect to the total number of times the 3-2 inspection process is performed, if the result of counting the first required time is large, the 3-2 inspection score can be low. Also, even if there are few selection results that are found to be correct with respect to the total number of times the 3-2 inspection process is performed, if the result of counting the first required time is small, the 3-2 inspection score can be high.

[0189] In this embodiment, the first processing unit 152 can provide the user terminal 200 with a text of how to execute the 3-2 inspection process before executing the 3-2 inspection process.

[0190] As an alternative embodiment, the first processing unit 152 can calculate the third test score by adding up the 3-1 test score and the 3-2 test score. Also, the first processing unit 152 can use each of the 3-1 test score and the 3-2 test score when evaluating cognitive decline, without adding up the 3-1 test score and the 3-2 test score. In this embodiment, if the third test score is higher than the cutoff score of the third criterion, it can be evaluated that the visual-perceptual memory is good, and if the third test score is lower than the cutoff score of the third criterion, it can be evaluated that the visual-perceptual memory has declined.

[0191] 7a to 7h are exemplary views of screens provided to the user terminal 200 for executing the third inspection process. Fig. 7a to Fig. 7d are exemplary views of screens explaining the 3-1 inspection process, and Fig. 7e to Fig. 7h are exemplary views of screens explaining the 3-2 inspection process.

[0192] 7a shows the start screen of the 3-1 inspection process. When the input of the start button 701 is received, the next screen can be switched to.

[0193] 7b shows a screen that provides a text of how to execute the 3-1 inspection process and notifies the start of the 3-1 inspection process. When the start button 702 is pressed, the next screen can be displayed.

[0194] 7c shows a screen for executing the 3-1 inspection process. After checking the 3-1 instruction, the user can select one of a "Yes" button 703 or a "No" button 704 depending on whether the number of colors in the first presented image is equal to or greater than a predetermined number. Here, a progress bar (not shown) may be further included to perform one or more of the functions of counting a time limit and indicating the progress of the work.

[0195] FIG. 7d shows a screen notifying the completion of the 3-1st inspection process and the start of the next inspection process.

[0196] 7e shows the start screen of the 3-2 inspection process. When the input of the start button 705 is received, the next screen can be switched to. Here, the start screen of the 3-2 inspection processor can be provided to the user terminal 200 after the execution of the 2-2 inspection process is completed.

[0197] FIG. 7f shows a screen inviting playback of the first presented image provided during execution of the 3-1 inspection process.

[0198] 7g shows a screen for executing the 3-2 inspection process. After checking the 3-2 instruction, the user can select one of a "Yes" button 706 or a "No" button 707 depending on whether the second presented image is the same as the first presented image. Here, a progress bar (not shown) may be further included to perform one or more of the functions of counting a time limit and indicating the progress of the work.

[0199] FIG. 7h shows a screen notifying the completion of the 3-2 inspection process and the start of the next inspection process.

[0200] 3, the first processing unit 152 can execute a fourth inspection process including a 4-1 inspection process and a 4-2 inspection process. In this embodiment, the first processing unit 152 can execute the fourth inspection process multiple times, except for the practice inspection.

[0201] When executing the 4-1 inspection process, the first processing unit 152 can provide the user terminal 200 with a 4-1 instruction sentence that shows a default presented word and two selected words and causes the user terminal 200 to select a word that is the same as the default presented word from the two selected words.

[0202] The first processing unit 152 can receive from the user terminal 200 a result of selecting a word that is the same as the predefined presented word from among two selected words in response to the 4-1 instruction sentence, and can compare the selected result with the correct answer to calculate the 4-1 test score. In this embodiment, the 4-1 test score can be calculated to be higher as the number of selected results that are found to be correct with respect to the total number of times the 4-1 test process is performed increases.

[0203] In this embodiment, before executing the 4-1 inspection process, the first processing unit 152 can provide the user terminal 200 with a text of how to execute the 4-1 inspection process, and allow the user terminal 200 to execute a practice inspection for the 4-1 inspection process.

[0204] The first processing unit 152 can execute the 4-2 inspection process after completing the execution of the 4-1 inspection process.

[0205] When performing the 4-2 inspection process, the first processing unit 152 can provide the user terminal 200 with a 4-2 instruction sentence that displays a pre-defined presented word and two color-selected words and prompts the user to select a word having the same color as the pre-defined presented word from the two color-selected words.

[0206] The first processing unit 152 can receive from the user terminal 200 a result of selecting a word having the same color as the predefined presented word from among two color-selected words in response to the 4-2 instruction sentence, and can compare the selected result with the correct answer to calculate the 4-2 test score. In this embodiment, the 4-2 test score can be calculated to be higher as the number of selected results that are found to be correct with respect to the total number of times the 4-2 test process is performed increases.

[0207] In this embodiment, before executing the 4-2 inspection process, the first processing unit 152 can provide the user terminal 200 with a text of how to execute the 4-2 inspection process, and allow the user terminal 200 to execute a practice inspection for the 4-2 inspection process.

[0208] As an alternative embodiment, the first processing unit 152 can calculate the fourth test score by adding up the 4-1 test score and the 4-2 test score. The first processing unit 152 can also use each of the 4-1 test score and the 4-2 test score when evaluating cognitive decline, without adding up the 4-1 test score and the 4-2 test score. In this embodiment, if the fourth test score is higher than the cutoff score of the fourth criterion, the inhibitory function can be evaluated as being good, and if the fourth test score is lower than the cutoff score of the fourth criterion, the inhibitory function can be evaluated as being declined.

[0209] 8a to 8n are exemplary views of screens provided to the user terminal 200 for executing the fourth inspection process. Fig. 8a to Fig. 8i are exemplary views of screens explaining the 4-1 inspection process, and Fig. 8j to Fig. 8n are exemplary views of screens explaining the 4-2 inspection process.

[0210] 8a shows the start screen of the fourth inspection process. When the input of the start button 801 is received, it is possible to switch to the fourth-first inspection process screen.

[0211] 8b shows a screen that provides a text of how to execute the 4-1 inspection process and notifies the start of a practice inspection process (4-1 practice inspection process) for the 4-1 inspection process. When the practice start button 802 is pressed, the screen can be switched to the next screen.

[0212] 8c shows a screen for executing the 4-1 practice test process. After checking the 4-1 practice instruction sentence, the user can select the same word as the presented word from the first selected word 803 and the second selected word 804. Here, a progress bar (not shown) that performs one or more of the functions of counting the time limit and indicating the progress of the task can be further included.

[0213] Figure 8d shows a screen indicating that the first selected word 805 from Figure 8c is the correct answer, where the first selected word 805 is the same as the first selected word 803 from Figure 8c.

[0214] 8e shows a screen for informing the user to re-execute the 4-1 practice test process. If the result of the 4-1 practice test process is an incorrect answer, the 4-1 practice test process can be re-executed.

[0215] FIG. 8f shows a screen notifying the user that the 4-1 practice test process has been completed and that the actual test will now be performed.

[0216] 8g shows a screen for executing the 4-1 inspection process. After checking the 4-1 instruction sentence, the user can select the same word as the presented word from among the first selected word 807 and the second selected word 808 while watching the progress bar 806.

[0217] Figure 8h shows a screen displaying that the first selected word 809 selected from Figure 8g is the correct answer, where the first selected word 809 is the same as the first selected word 807 in Figure 8g.

[0218] FIG. 8i shows a screen notifying the completion of the 4-1st inspection process and the start of the next inspection process.

[0219] 8j shows a screen that provides a text of how to execute the 4-2 inspection process and notifies the start of a practice inspection process (4-2 practice inspection process) for the 4-2 inspection process. When the practice start button 810 is pressed, the next screen can be displayed.

[0220] FIG. 8k shows a screen for executing the 4-2 practice test process. After checking the 4-2 practice instruction sentence, the user can select a word having the same color as the presented word from among the first selected word 811 and the second selected word 812. Here, a progress bar (not shown) performing one or more of a function of counting a time limit and a function of indicating the progress of the work may be further included. FIG. 8k shows an example in which the user selects the second selected word 812.

[0221] FIG. 8l shows a screen notifying the user that the 4-2 practice test process has been completed and that the actual test will now be performed.

[0222] Fig. 8m shows a screen for executing the 4-2 inspection process. After checking the 4-2 instruction sentence, the user can select a word having the same color as the presented word from among the first selected word 814 and the second selected word 815 while looking at the progress bar 813. Fig. 8m shows an example in which the user selects the second selected word 815.

[0223] FIG. 8n shows a screen notifying the completion of the 4-2 inspection process and the start of the next inspection process.

[0224] 3, the first processing unit 152 can execute a fifth inspection process. In this embodiment, the first processing unit 152 can execute the fifth inspection process multiple times, except for the practice inspection.

[0225] When performing the fifth inspection process, the first processing unit 152 can present a plurality of selected lines having angles different from those of a default presented line, and provide an instruction to the user terminal 200 to select the line having the angle most similar to that of the presented line from the plurality of selected lines.

[0226] The first processing unit 152 can receive from the user terminal 200 a result of selecting a line having an angle most similar to that of the presented line from among the multiple selected lines in response to the fifth instruction sentence, and can compare the selected result with the correct line to calculate a fifth inspection score. In this embodiment, the fifth inspection score can be calculated to be higher as the number of selected results that are found to be correct with respect to the total number of times the fifth inspection process is performed increases.

[0227] In this embodiment, before executing the fifth inspection process, the first processing unit 152 can provide the user terminal 200 with a text of how to execute the fifth inspection process, and allow the user terminal 200 to execute a practice inspection for the fifth inspection process.

[0228] In this embodiment, if the fifth test score is higher than the cutoff score of the fifth criterion, the spatiotemporal perception ability can be evaluated as good, and if the fifth test score is lower than the cutoff score of the fifth criterion, the spatiotemporal perception ability can be evaluated as poor. Also, as shown in Fig. 9 below, by changing the positions of the presentation line and the multiple selection lines, unilateral abnormality can be analyzed from the test results.

[0229] 9a to 9h are exemplary views of screens provided to the user terminal 200 for executing the fifth inspection process.

[0230] 9a shows the start screen of the fifth inspection process. Once the start button 901 input is received, it is possible to switch to the next screen.

[0231] 9b shows a screen that provides a text of how to execute the fifth inspection process and notifies the start of a practice inspection process (fifth practice inspection process) for the fifth inspection process. When the practice start button 902 is pressed, the next screen can be displayed.

[0232] 9c shows a screen for executing the fifth practice inspection process. After checking the fifth practice instruction, the user can select a line from the multiple selection lines shown on the right side that has the most similar angle to the suggested line shown on the left side. Here, a progress bar (not shown) that performs one or more of the functions of counting a time limit and indicating the progress of the work can be further included. After the user selects a line, the next screen can be switched to by pressing the Confirm button 903.

[0233] 9d shows a screen for informing the user to re-run the fifth practice test process. If the fifth practice test process results in a wrong answer, the fifth practice test process can be re-run.

[0234] FIG. 9e shows a screen indicating that the fifth practice test process has been completed and that the actual test will now be performed.

[0235] 9f shows an embodiment of a screen for executing the fifth inspection process. After confirming the fifth instruction, the user can select a line that has the most similar angle to the proposed line shown on the left side from among the multiple selected lines shown on the right side while watching the progress bar 904. After the user selects a line, the user can switch to the next screen by pressing a confirm button 905.

[0236] 9g shows another embodiment of the screen for executing the fifth inspection process. After confirming the fifth instruction sentence, the user can select a line that has the most similar angle to the proposed line shown on the right side from among the multiple selected lines shown on the left side while watching the progress bar 906. After the user selects a line, the user can switch to the next screen by pressing the confirm button 907.

[0237] FIG. 9h shows a screen indicating that the fifth inspection process has been completed and the next inspection process is about to begin.

[0238] 3, the first processing unit 152 can execute a sixth inspection process. In this embodiment, the first processing unit 152 can execute the sixth inspection process multiple times, except for the practice inspection.

[0239] When performing the sixth inspection process, the first processing unit 152 can provide the user terminal 200 with a sixth instruction sentence that displays a plurality of predefined presentation figures and causes the user terminal 200 to select a figure having a different color from the plurality of predefined presentation figures.

[0240] The first processing unit 152 can receive from the user terminal 200 a result of selecting shapes of different colors from a plurality of predefined presentation shapes in response to the sixth instruction sentence, and can compare the selected result with the correct answer to calculate a sixth test score. In this embodiment, the sixth test score can be calculated to be higher as the number of selected results that are found to be correct with respect to the total number of times the sixth test process is performed increases.

[0241] In this embodiment, before executing the sixth inspection process, the first processing unit 152 can provide the user terminal 200 with a text of how to execute the sixth inspection process, and allow the user terminal 200 to execute a practice inspection for the sixth inspection process.

[0242] In this embodiment, if the sixth test score is higher than the cutoff score of the sixth criterion, the color classification ability can be evaluated as good, and if the sixth test score is lower than the cutoff score of the sixth criterion, the color classification ability can be evaluated as degraded.

[0243] 10a to 10j are exemplary views of screens provided to the user terminal 200 for executing the sixth inspection process.

[0244] 10a shows the start screen of the sixth inspection process. When the input of the start button 1001 is received, it is possible to switch to the next screen.

[0245] 10b shows a screen that provides a text of how to execute the sixth inspection process and notifies the start of a practice inspection process (sixth practice inspection process) for the sixth inspection process. When the practice start button 1002 is pressed, the next screen can be displayed.

[0246] 10c shows a screen for executing the sixth practice test process. After checking the sixth practice instruction, the user can select a shape of a different color from a plurality of pre-defined presented shapes while watching the progress bar 1003. When the selection of the shape is completed or the time limit is counted, the user can switch to the next screen.

[0247] Fig. 10d shows a screen showing the results of the execution of the sixth practice test process shown in Fig. 10c. If the selected figure is the correct answer, a correct answer symbol and / or a correct answer sound effect can be used to output that the answer is correct, and if the selected figure is the incorrect answer, an incorrect answer symbol and / or an incorrect answer sound effect can be used to output that the answer is incorrect.

[0248] 10e shows a screen for informing the user to re-execute the sixth practice test process. If the execution result of the sixth practice test process is an incorrect answer, the sixth practice test process can be re-executed.

[0249] FIG. 10f shows a screen indicating that the sixth practice test process has been completed and that the actual test will now be performed.

[0250] 10g shows a screen that provides text on how to execute the sixth inspection process and notifies the start of the sixth inspection process. When the start button 1004 is pressed, the next screen can be displayed.

[0251] 10h shows a screen for executing the sixth inspection process. After confirming the sixth instruction sentence, the user can select a different colored shape from a plurality of pre-defined presented shapes while watching the progress bar 1005. When the selection of the shape is completed or the time limit is counted, the user can switch to the next screen.

[0252] Fig. 10i shows a screen showing the results of the execution of the sixth inspection process shown in Fig. 10h. If the selected figure is the correct answer, a correct answer symbol and / or a correct answer sound effect can be used to output that the answer is correct. If the selected figure is the incorrect answer, an incorrect answer symbol and / or an incorrect answer sound effect can be used to output that the answer is incorrect.

[0253] FIG. 10j shows a screen indicating that the sixth inspection process has been completed and the next inspection process is about to begin.

[0254] 3, the first processing unit 152 can execute a seventh inspection process including a 7-1 inspection process and a 7-2 inspection process. In this embodiment, the first processing unit 152 can execute the seventh inspection process multiple times.

[0255] When performing the 7-1 inspection process, the first processing unit 152 can provide the user terminal 200 with a 7-1 instruction statement that displays a plurality of first object presentation images including the name of the first object and the shape of the first object, and causes the user terminal 200 to determine the size of each of the first objects and select the plurality of first object presentation images in descending order.

[0256] The first processing unit 152 can receive the result of selecting the first object presenting image in descending order in response to the 7-1 instruction sentence from the user terminal 200, and calculate the 7-1 test score by comparing the selected result with the correct answer. In this embodiment, the 7-1 test score can be calculated to be higher as the number of selection results that are found to be correct with respect to the total number of times the 7-1 process is executed increases.

[0257] In this embodiment, the first processing unit 152 can provide the user terminal 200 with a text of how to execute the 7-1 inspection process before executing the 7-1 inspection process.

[0258] The first processing unit 152 can execute the 7-2 inspection process after completing the execution of the 7-1 inspection process.

[0259] When performing the 7-2 inspection process, the first processing unit 152 can provide the user terminal 200 with a 7-2 instruction statement that displays a plurality of second object presentation images including the shape of the second object, determines the weight of each of the second objects, and selects the plurality of second object presentation images in descending order.

[0260] The first processing unit 152 can receive from the user terminal 200 the result of selecting the second object presenting image in descending order in response to the 7-2 instruction sentence, and compare the selected result with the correct answer to calculate the 7-2 test score.

[0261] In this embodiment, the first processing unit 152 may provide the user terminal 200 with a text of how to execute the 7-2 inspection process before executing the 7-2 inspection process. In this embodiment, the 7-2 inspection score may be calculated to be higher as the number of selection results that are found to be correct with respect to the total number of times the 7-2 process is executed increases.

[0262] As an alternative embodiment, the first processing unit 152 can calculate the seventh test score by adding up the 7-1 test score and the 7-2 test score. The first processing unit 152 can also use each of the 7-1 test score and the 7-2 test score when evaluating cognitive decline, without adding up the 7-1 test score and the 7-2 test score. In this embodiment, if the 7th test score is higher than the cutoff score of the 7th criterion, it can be evaluated that the semantic memory is good, and if the 7th test score is lower than the cutoff score of the 7th criterion, it can be evaluated that the semantic memory has declined.

[0263] 11a to 11h are exemplary views of screens provided to the user terminal 200 for executing the seventh inspection process. Figs. 11a to 11e are exemplary views of screens explaining the 7-1 inspection process, and Figs. 11f to 11h are exemplary views of screens explaining the 7-2 inspection process.

[0264] 11a shows the start screen of the seventh inspection process. When the input of the start button 1101 is received, it is possible to switch to the seventh-1st inspection process screen.

[0265] 11b shows a screen that provides a text of how to execute the 7-1 inspection process and notifies the start of the 7-1 inspection process. When the start button 1102 is pressed, the screen can be switched to the next screen.

[0266] Fig. 11c shows a screen for executing the 7-1 inspection process. After checking the 7-1 instruction sentence, the user can select multiple first object presenting images in order of size while looking at the progress bar 1103. If the user needs to correct the selection, he / she inputs the input correction button 1104 to make a reselection. When the user completes the selection and inputs the confirmation button 1105, the screen can be switched to the next screen.

[0267] 11d shows a screen showing the results of the execution of the inspection process 7-1. A number indicating the order selected by the user may be displayed on the first object presenting image.

[0268] FIG. 11e shows a screen notifying the completion of the 7-1 inspection process and the start of the next inspection process.

[0269] 11f shows a screen that provides a text of how to execute the 7-2 inspection process and notifies the start of the 7-2 inspection process. When the start button 1106 is pressed, the next screen can be displayed.

[0270] FIG. 11g shows a screen for executing the 7-2 inspection process. After checking the 7-2 instruction text, the user can select multiple second object presenting images in order of weight while watching the progress bar 1107. If the user needs to correct the selection, he / she inputs the input correction button 1108 to make a reselection. When the user completes the selection and inputs the confirmation button 1109, the screen can be switched to the next screen.

[0271] FIG. 11h shows a screen notifying the completion of the 7-2 inspection process and the start of the next inspection process.

[0272] 3, the first processing unit 152 can execute an eighth inspection process. In this embodiment, the first processing unit 152 can execute the eighth inspection process, except for the practice inspection, multiple times.

[0273] When performing the eighth inspection process, the first processing unit 152 can provide the user terminal 200 with an eighth instruction sentence that shows a pre-defined face-presentation image expressing an emotion and a plurality of buttons for selecting the intensity of the emotion, and causes the user terminal 200 to select the intensity of the emotion shown in the pre-defined face-presentation image with any one of the plurality of buttons.

[0274] The first processing unit 152 can receive from the user terminal 200 a result of selecting the intensity of emotion shown in a predetermined face presentation image in response to the eighth instruction sentence using one of a plurality of buttons, and can compare the selected result with a correct answer to calculate an eighth test score. In this embodiment, the eighth test score can be calculated to be higher as the number of selected results that are found to be correct with respect to the total number of times the eighth test process is performed increases.

[0275] In this embodiment, before executing the eighth inspection process, the first processing unit 152 can provide the user terminal 200 with a text of how to execute the eighth inspection process, and allow the user terminal 200 to execute a practice inspection for the eighth inspection process.

[0276] In this embodiment, if the eighth test score is higher than the cutoff score of the eighth criterion, it can be evaluated that the emotion intensity recognition ability is good, and if the eighth test score is lower than the cutoff score of the eighth criterion, it can be evaluated that the emotion intensity recognition ability has deteriorated.

[0277] 12a to 12g are exemplary views of screens provided to the user terminal 200 for executing the eighth inspection process.

[0278] 12a shows the start screen of the eighth inspection process. When the input of the start button 1201 is received, it is possible to switch to the next screen.

[0279] 12b shows a screen that provides a text of how to execute the eighth inspection process and notifies the start of a practice inspection process (eighth practice inspection process) for the eighth inspection process. When the practice start button 1202 is pressed, the next screen can be displayed.

[0280] FIG. 12c shows a screen for executing the eighth practice test process. After checking the eighth practice instruction sentence, the user can select the intensity of the emotion shown in the face presentation image by using any one of the plurality of buttons 1203. Here, a progress bar (not shown) performing one or more of a function of counting a time limit and a function of indicating the progress of the work may be further included. In this embodiment, the larger the size of the plurality of buttons 1203, the stronger the intensity of the emotion may be.

[0281] 12d shows a screen showing the results of the execution of the inspection process No. 8. The intensity of the emotion selected by the user can be output to any one of a plurality of buttons 1204.

[0282] FIG. 12e shows a screen indicating that the eighth practice test process has been completed and that the actual test will now be performed.

[0283] 12f shows an embodiment of a screen for executing the eighth inspection process. After confirming the eighth instruction sentence, the user can select the intensity of the emotion shown in the face presentation image by pressing any one of a plurality of buttons 1206 while watching the progress bar 1205. When the user has completed the selection of any one of the plurality of buttons 1206 or the time limit has expired, the screen can be switched to the next screen.

[0284] FIG. 12g shows a screen indicating that the eighth inspection process has been completed and the next inspection process is about to begin.

[0285] 3, the first processing unit 152 can execute a ninth inspection process. In this embodiment, the first processing unit 152 can execute the ninth inspection process multiple times.

[0286] When executing the ninth inspection process, the first processing unit 152 can provide the user terminal 200 with a ninth instruction sentence that displays a default suggested paragraph, a start recording button, and an end recording button, prompts the user to input the start recording button, speak the default suggested paragraph, and then, when the speaking of the paragraph is completed, inputs the end recording button.

[0287] After receiving input of a start recording button from the user terminal 200 in response to the ninth instruction sentence, the first processing unit 152 can receive and store the speech result for the default presentation paragraph, and can receive input of an end recording button.

[0288] The first processing unit 152 can count a second required time from the time when the input of the recording start button is received to the time when the input of the recording stop button is received.

[0289] The first processing unit 152 can convert the speech result for a given presented paragraph into a paragraph speech text, and compare the number of phrases included in the paragraph speech text with the number of correct phrases.

[0290] The first processing unit 152 can calculate a ninth inspection score by reflecting the result of the comparison and the result of counting the second required time. In this embodiment, the ninth inspection score can be calculated differently depending on the number of phrases found to be correct for the total number of times the ninth inspection process is performed and the result of counting the second required time. Even if the number of phrases found to be correct for the total number of times the ninth inspection process is performed is large, the ninth inspection score can be low if the result of counting the second required time is large. Also, even if the number of phrases found to be correct for the total number of times the ninth inspection process is performed is small, the ninth inspection score can be high if the result of counting the second required time is small.

[0291] In this embodiment, before executing the ninth inspection process, the first processing unit 152 can provide the user terminal 200 with a text of how to execute the ninth inspection process.

[0292] In this embodiment, if the 9th test score is higher than the cutoff score of the 9th criterion, the reading ability can be evaluated as good, and if the 9th test score is lower than the cutoff score of the 9th criterion, the reading ability can be evaluated as deteriorated.

[0293] 13a to 13d are exemplary views of screens provided to the user terminal 200 for executing the ninth inspection process.

[0294] 13a shows the start screen of the 9th inspection process. When the input of the start button 1301 is received, it is possible to switch to the next screen.

[0295] 13b shows a screen that provides text on how to execute the ninth inspection process and notifies the start of the ninth inspection process. When the start button 1302 is pressed, the next screen can be displayed.

[0296] 13c shows a screen for executing the ninth practice inspection process. The user can confirm the ninth practice instruction sentence, input a start button 1303, and then speak the suggested paragraph, and after completing the speech of the suggested paragraph, input an end button 1304. Here, a progress bar (not shown) that performs one or more of the functions of counting a time limit and indicating the progress of the work may be further included.

[0297] FIG. 13d shows a screen indicating that the ninth inspection process has been completed and the next inspection process is about to begin.

[0298] 3, the first processing unit 152 can execute a tenth inspection process including a tenth-1 inspection process and a tenth-2 inspection process. In this embodiment, the first processing unit 152 can execute the tenth inspection process multiple times, except for the practice inspection.

[0299] When performing the 10-1 inspection process, the first processing unit 152 can provide the user terminal 200 with a 10-1 instruction sentence that indicates a predetermined area and reproduces and inputs sequentially the positions and order in which predetermined presentation figures appear within the predetermined area.

[0300] The first processing unit 152 can provide the user terminal 200 with a first demo video in which a predetermined presentation figure is sequentially made to appear within a predetermined area while providing the 10-1 instruction sentence.

[0301] After the first demo video ends, the first processing unit 152 can receive the result of playing the first demo video from the user terminal 200 and sequentially inputting the positions and order in which the predefined presentation figures appear within the predefined area. Here, the user can play the first demo video and sequentially input the positions and order in which the presentation figures appear.

[0302] The first processing unit 152 can calculate the 10-1 inspection score by comparing the results of sequentially inputting the positions and sequences of the predetermined presentation figures in the predetermined area with the correct answer. In this embodiment, the 10-1 inspection score can be calculated to be higher as the number of input results that are found to be correct with respect to the total number of times the 10-1 inspection process is performed.

[0303] In this embodiment, before executing the 10-1 inspection process, the first processing unit 152 can provide the user terminal 200 with a text of how to execute the 10-1 inspection process, and allow the user terminal 200 to execute a practice inspection for the 10-1 inspection process.

[0304] The first processing unit 152 can execute the 10-2 inspection process after completing the execution of the 10-1 inspection process.

[0305] When performing the 10-2 inspection process, the first processing unit 152 can provide the user terminal 200 with a 10-2 instruction sentence that indicates a predetermined area and reproduces and inputs in reverse the position and order in which a predetermined presentation figure appears within the predetermined area.

[0306] The first processing unit 152 can provide the user terminal 200 with a second demo video in which a predetermined presentation figure is sequentially made to appear within a predetermined area while providing the 10-2 instruction sentence.

[0307] After the second demo video ends, the first processing unit 152 can play the second demo video from the user terminal 200 and receive the result of inputting the position and order in which the predefined presentation figures appear in the predefined area in reverse. Here, the user can play the second demo video and input the position and order in which the presentation figures appear in reverse.

[0308] The first processing unit 152 can compare the input result of reversing the position and order of the predetermined presentation figure in the predetermined area with the correct answer to calculate the 10-2 test score. In this embodiment, the 10-2 test score can be calculated to be higher as the number of input results that are found to be correct with respect to the total number of times the 10-2 test process is performed increases.

[0309] In this embodiment, before executing the 10-2 inspection process, the first processing unit 152 can provide the user terminal 200 with a text of how to execute the 10-2 inspection process, and allow the user terminal 200 to execute a practice inspection for the 10-2 inspection process.

[0310] As an alternative embodiment, the first processing unit 152 may calculate the tenth test score by adding up the 10-1 test score and the 10-2 test score. Alternatively, the first processing unit 152 may use each of the 10-1 test score and the 10-2 test score when evaluating cognitive decline, without adding up the 10-1 test score and the 10-2 test score. In this embodiment, when the 10th test score is higher than the cutoff score of the 10th criterion, it can be evaluated that the attention and working memory are good, and when the 10th test score is lower than the cutoff score of the 10th criterion, it can be evaluated that the attention and working memory are deteriorated.

[0311] 14a to 14o are exemplary views of screens provided to the user terminal 200 for executing the tenth inspection process. 14a to 14h are exemplary views of screens explaining the 10-1 inspection process, and 14i to 14o are exemplary views of screens explaining the 10-2 inspection process.

[0312] 14a shows the start screen of the inspection process No. 10. When the input of the start button 1401 is received, it is possible to switch to the inspection process screen No. 10-1.

[0313] 14b shows a screen that provides a text of how to execute the 10-1 inspection process and notifies the start of a practice inspection process (10-1 practice inspection process) for the 10-1 inspection process. When the practice start button 1402 is pressed, the next screen can be displayed.

[0314] FIG 14c shows an embodiment of a screen for performing the 10-1 practice inspection process. FIG 14c shows the 1st practice demo video along with the 10-1 practice instruction text. It may also include an input correction button 1403 for correcting the input and a confirmation button 1404 for completing the input.

[0315] Fig. 14d shows another embodiment of the screen for executing the 10-1 practice inspection process. The user can play the first practice demo video of Fig. 14c and sequentially input the position and order in which the presentation figures appear in the predetermined area. If the user needs to correct the input, the user can input the input correction button 1405 to perform the input correction. When the user has completed the input, the user can input the confirmation button 1406.

[0316] FIG. 14e shows a screen notifying the completion of the 10-1 practice test process and the execution of the actual test.

[0317] 14f shows a screen informing the user of the 10-1 instruction and the start of the 10-1 inspection process. When the start button 1407 is pressed, the user can switch to the next screen.

[0318] FIG. 14g shows a screen for executing the 10-1 inspection process. FIG. 14g shows a screen displayed after the first demo video is played. The user can play the first demo video and sequentially input the position and order in which the presentation figures appear in the predetermined area. If the user needs to correct the input, the user can input the input correction button 1408 to perform the input correction. If the user has completed the input, the user can input the confirmation button 1409.

[0319] FIG. 14h shows a screen notifying the completion of the 10-1 inspection process and the start of the next inspection process.

[0320] 5k shows a screen notifying the start of the practice test process for the 10-2 practice test process (10-2 practice test process). When the practice start button 1410 is input, the screen can be switched to the next screen.

[0321] FIG. 14j shows an embodiment of a screen for performing the 10-2 practice test process. FIG. 14j shows a 2nd practice demo video with the 10-2 practice instruction text. It may also include an input correction button 1411 for correcting the input and a confirmation button 1412 for completing the input.

[0322] Fig. 14k shows another embodiment of the screen for executing the 10-2 practice inspection process. The user can play the second practice demo video of Fig. 14j and input the position and order in which the presentation figures appear in the predetermined area in reverse. If the user needs to correct the input, the user can input the input correction button 1413 to perform the input correction. If the user has completed the input, the user can input the confirmation button 1414.

[0323] FIG. 14l shows a screen notifying the completion of the 10-2 practice test process and the execution of the actual test.

[0324] 14m shows a screen informing the user of the 10-2 instruction sentence and the start of the 10-2 inspection process. When the start button 1415 is pressed, the user can switch to the next screen.

[0325] FIG. 14n shows a screen for executing the 10-2 inspection process. FIG. 14n shows a screen displayed after the second demo video is played. The user can play the second demo video and input the position and order in which the presentation figures appear in the predetermined area in reverse. If the user needs to correct the input, the user can input the input correction button 1436 to perform the input correction. If the user has completed the input, the user can input the confirmation button 1417.

[0326] FIG. 14o shows a screen notifying the completion of the 10-2 inspection process and the start of the next inspection process.

[0327] 3, the first processing unit 152 can execute an eleventh inspection process including an eleventh inspection process and an eleventh inspection process including an eleventh-1 inspection process and an eleventh-2 inspection process. In this embodiment, the first processing unit 152 can execute the eleventh inspection process, except for the practice inspection, multiple times.

[0328] When performing the 11-1 inspection process, the first processing unit 152 can provide the user terminal 200 with an 11-1 instruction sentence that shows a first presented incomplete sentence in which a word is missing and two first selected words, and causes the user to select an accurate word that can complete the first presented incomplete sentence from the two first selected words.

[0329] The first processing unit 152 can receive from the user terminal 200 a result of selecting an accurate word that can complete the first presented incomplete sentence corresponding to the 11-1 instruction sentence from among the two first selected words, and can compare the selected result with the correct answer to calculate the 11-1 test score. In this embodiment, the 11-1 test score can be calculated to be higher as the number of selected results that are found to be correct with respect to the total number of times the 11-1 test process is performed increases.

[0330] In this embodiment, before executing the 11-1 inspection process, the first processing unit 152 can provide the user terminal 200 with a text of how to execute the 11-1 inspection process, and allow the user terminal 200 to execute a practice inspection for the 11-1 inspection process.

[0331] The first processing unit 152 can execute the 11-2 inspection process after completing the execution of the 11-1 inspection process.

[0332] When performing the 11-2 inspection process, the first processing unit 152 can provide the user terminal 200 with an 11-2 instruction sentence that shows a second presented incomplete sentence in which a word is missing and two second selected words, and causes the user to select an unnatural word from the two second selected words to complete the second presented incomplete sentence.

[0333] The first processing unit 152 can receive from the user terminal 200 a selection result of an unnatural word from among the two second selected words to complete the second presented incomplete sentence in response to the 11-2 instruction sentence, and can compare the selected result with the correct answer to calculate the 11-2 test score. In this embodiment, the 11-2 test score can be calculated to be higher as the number of selected results that are found to be correct with respect to the total number of times the 11-2 test process is performed increases.

[0334] In this embodiment, before executing the 11-2 inspection process, the first processing unit 152 can provide the user terminal 200 with a text of how to execute the 11-2 inspection process, and allow the user terminal 200 to execute a practice inspection for the 11-2 inspection process.

[0335] As an alternative embodiment, the first processing unit 152 can calculate the 11th test score by adding up the 11-1 test score and the 11-2 test score. The first processing unit 152 can also use each of the 11-1 test score and the 11-2 test score when evaluating cognitive decline, without adding up the 11-1 test score and the 11-2 test score. In this embodiment, if the 11th test score is higher than the cutoff score of the 11th criterion, it can be evaluated that the verbal inhibition is good, and if the 11th test score is lower than the cutoff score of the 11th criterion, it can be evaluated that the verbal inhibition is decreased.

[0336] 15a to 15k are exemplary views of screens provided to the user terminal 200 for executing the eleventh inspection process.

[0337] 15a shows the start screen of the 11th inspection process. When the input of the start button 1501 is received, it is possible to switch to the next screen.

[0338] 15b shows a screen that provides a text of how to execute the 11-1 inspection process and notifies the start of a practice inspection process (11th practice inspection process) for the 11th inspection process. When the practice start button 1502 is pressed, the screen can be switched to the next screen.

[0339] Fig. 15c shows an embodiment of a screen for executing the 11-2 practice test process of the 11th practice test process. Fig. 15c shows the 11-2 practice instruction sentence, the second practice presented incomplete sentence, and a first word button 1503 and a second word button 1504 that are unnatural for completing the second presented incomplete sentence.

[0340] Fig. 15d shows the second word button 1505 selected by the user in response to the 11-2 practice instruction sentence from the screen of Fig. 15c. If the selected word is correct, a correct answer symbol and / or a correct answer sound effect can be used to output that the answer is correct. If the selected word is incorrect, an incorrect answer symbol and / or an incorrect answer sound effect can be used to output that the answer is incorrect.

[0341] FIG. 15e shows a screen indicating that the 11th practice test process has been completed and the actual test will now be performed.

[0342] 15f shows a screen informing the start of the 11th inspection process. When the start button 1506 is pressed, the screen can be switched to the next screen.

[0343] Figure 15g shows one embodiment of a screen for performing the 11-1 test process. Figure 15g shows the 11-1 instruction sentence, the first suggested incomplete sentence, and a first word button 1507 and a second word button 1508 that can complete the first suggested incomplete sentence.

[0344] FIG. 15h shows the first word button 1509 selected by the user in response to instruction sentence 11-1 from the screen of FIG. 15g.

[0345] Figure 15i shows an embodiment of a screen for performing the 11-2 inspection process. Figure 15i shows the 11-2 instruction sentence, the second proposed incomplete sentence, and a first word button 1510 and a second word button 1511 that are unnatural for completing the second proposed incomplete sentence.

[0346] FIG. 15j shows the second word button 1512 selected by the user in response to instruction sentence 11-2 from the FIG. 15i screen.

[0347] FIG. 15k shows a screen indicating that the eleventh inspection process has been completed and that the inspection results are waiting to be output.

[0348] Returning to FIG. 3, when the first processing unit 152 completes execution of the first to eleventh testing processes, the second processing unit 153 can execute a category classification process to classify at least one of the multiple test items into any one of multiple neurocognitive categories.

[0349] The second processing unit 153 can classify the second test item and the third test item into the first neurocognitive category. The second processing unit 153 can classify the eighth test item into the second neurocognitive category. The second processing unit 153 can classify the seventh test item and the ninth test item into the third neurocognitive category. The second processing unit 153 can classify the fifth test item and the sixth test item into the fourth neurocognitive category. The second processing unit 153 can classify the first test item, the fourth test item, the tenth test item, and the eleventh test item into the fifth neurocognitive category.

[0350] Once the second processing unit 153 has completed executing the category classification process, the third processing unit 154 can execute an evaluation process to evaluate whether or not there is cognitive decline in the neurocognitive category based on the test scores for the test items classified into the neurocognitive category.

[0351] In this embodiment, the third processing unit 154 can generate an evaluation result that outputs that the user may have mild cognitive impairment if cognitive function decline is assessed in one or more of the first neurocognitive category to the fifth neurocognitive category.

[0352] In this embodiment, the evaluation process may include a first evaluation process to a fifth evaluation process.

[0353] The third processing unit 154 can execute a first evaluation process to evaluate whether or not there is cognitive decline in the first neurocognitive category based on the second test score and the third test score.

[0354] When performing the first evaluation process, the third processing unit 154 can compare the second test score for the second test item with the second reference score, and generate a first comparison result when the second test score is less than the second reference score. In this embodiment, the second test score can include a verbal cue memory test score. In this embodiment, the second reference score can include a second test score of a normal group whose second Z-score is a second standard deviation (e.g., -1.5 SD).

[0355] In this embodiment, the first comparison result may include a 1-1 comparison result and a 1-2 comparison result. The 1-1 comparison result may be generated when the second test score is less than a second reference score. The 1-1 comparison result indicates that the user's verbal memory has deteriorated. The 1-2 comparison result may be generated when the second test score is equal to or greater than the second reference score. The 1-2 comparison result indicates that the user's verbal memory is good. In this embodiment, the first comparison result may be replaced with the 1-1 comparison result.

[0356] The third processing unit 154 may compare the third test score for the third test item with a third reference score, and generate a second comparison result when the third test score is less than the third reference score. In this embodiment, the third test score may include a visual schematic memory test score. In this embodiment, the third reference score may include a third test score of a normal group in which the third Z-score is a third standard deviation (e.g., -1.5 SD).

[0357] In this embodiment, the second comparison result may include a 2-1 comparison result and a 2-2 comparison result. The 2-1 comparison result may be generated when the third test score is less than the third reference score. The 2-1 comparison result indicates that the user's visual perception memory has deteriorated. The 2-2 comparison result may be generated when the third test score is equal to or greater than the third reference score. The 2-2 comparison result indicates that the user's visual perception memory is good. In this embodiment, the second comparison result may be replaced with the 2-1 comparison result.

[0358] The third processing unit 154 can evaluate that there is a cognitive decline in the first neurocognitive category, i.e., memory, by generating one or more of the first comparison result and the second comparison result.

[0359] The third processing unit 154 can execute a second evaluation process to evaluate whether or not there is cognitive decline in a second neurocognitive category based on the eighth test score.

[0360] When performing the second evaluation process, the third processing unit 154 may compare the eighth test score for the eighth test item with the eighth reference score, and generate a third comparison result when the eighth test score is less than the eighth reference score. In this embodiment, the eighth test score may include a facial emotion test score. In this embodiment, the eighth reference score may include an eighth test score of a normal group whose eighth Z-score is the eighth standard deviation (e.g., -1.5 SD).

[0361] In this embodiment, the third comparison result may include a 3-1 comparison result and a 3-2 comparison result. The 3-1 comparison result may be generated when the 8th test score is less than the 8th reference score. From the 3-1 comparison result, it can be seen that the emotion intensity recognition ability for the user has decreased. The 3-2 comparison result may be generated when the 8th test score is equal to or greater than the 8th reference score. From the 3-2 comparison result, it can be seen that the emotion intensity recognition ability for the user is good. In this embodiment, the third comparison result may be replaced with the 3-1 comparison result.

[0362] The third processing unit 154 can evaluate that there is cognitive decline in the second neurocognitive category, that is, social cognition, by generating the third comparison result.

[0363] The third processing unit 154 can execute a third evaluation process to evaluate whether there is cognitive decline in a third neurocognitive category based on the seventh test score and the ninth test score.

[0364] When performing the third evaluation process, the third processing unit 154 may compare the seventh test score for the seventh test item with the seventh reference score, and generate a fourth comparison result when the seventh test score is less than the seventh reference score. In this embodiment, the seventh test score may include a size and weight test score. In this embodiment, the seventh reference score may include a seventh test score of a normal group whose seventh Z-score is the seventh standard deviation (e.g., -1.5 SD).

[0365] In this embodiment, the fourth comparison result may include a 4-1 comparison result and a 4-2 comparison result. The 4-1 comparison result may be generated when the seventh test score is less than the seventh reference score. The 4-1 comparison result indicates that the user's semantic memory has deteriorated. The 4-2 comparison result may be generated when the seventh test score is equal to or greater than the seventh reference score. The 4-2 comparison result indicates that the user's semantic memory is good. In this embodiment, the fourth comparison result may be replaced with the 4-1 comparison result.

[0366] The third processing unit 154 may compare the ninth test score for the ninth test item with a ninth reference score, and generate a fifth comparison result when the ninth test score is less than the ninth reference score. In this embodiment, the ninth test score may include a paragraph reading test score. In this embodiment, the ninth reference score may include a ninth test score of a normal group whose ninth Z-score is a ninth standard deviation (e.g., -1.5 SD).

[0367] In this embodiment, the fifth comparison result may include a fifth comparison result and a fifth comparison result. The fifth comparison result may be generated when the ninth test score is less than the ninth reference score. The fifth comparison result may indicate that the user's reading ability has deteriorated. The fifth comparison result may be generated when the ninth test score is equal to or greater than the ninth reference score. The fifth comparison result may indicate that the user's reading ability is good. In this embodiment, the fifth comparison result may be replaced with the fifth comparison result.

[0368] The third processing unit 154 can evaluate that there is cognitive impairment in the third neurocognitive category, that is, language, by generating one or more of the fourth comparison result and the fifth comparison result.

[0369] The third processing unit 154 can execute a fourth evaluation process to evaluate whether or not there is cognitive decline in a fourth neurocognitive category based on the fifth test score and the sixth test score.

[0370] When performing the fourth evaluation process, the third processing unit 154 may compare the fifth test score for the fifth test item with a fifth reference score, and generate a sixth comparison result when the fifth test score is less than the fifth reference score. In this embodiment, the fifth test score may include a line angle perception test score. In this embodiment, the fifth reference score may include a fifth test score of a normal group whose fifth Z-score is the fifth standard deviation (e.g., -1.5 SD).

[0371] In this embodiment, the sixth comparison result may include a sixth comparison result and a sixth comparison result. The sixth comparison result may be generated when the fifth test score is less than the fifth reference score. The sixth comparison result may indicate that the user's spatiotemporal perception ability has deteriorated. The sixth comparison result may be generated when the fifth test score is equal to or greater than the fifth reference score. The sixth comparison result may indicate that the user's spatiotemporal perception ability is good. In this embodiment, the sixth comparison result may be replaced with the sixth comparison result.

[0372] The third processing unit 154 may compare the sixth test score for the sixth test item with a sixth reference score, and generate a seventh comparison result when the sixth test score is less than the sixth reference score. In this embodiment, the sixth test score may include a color perception test score. In this embodiment, the sixth reference score may include a sixth test score of a normal group having a sixth Z-score of the sixth standard deviation (e.g., -1.5 SD).

[0373] In this embodiment, the seventh comparison result may include a 7-1 comparison result and a 7-2 comparison result. The 7-1 comparison result may be generated when the sixth test score is less than the sixth reference score. The 7-1 comparison result indicates that the user's color classification ability has deteriorated. The 7-2 comparison result may be generated when the sixth test score is equal to or greater than the sixth reference score. The 7-2 comparison result indicates that the user's color classification ability is good. In this embodiment, the seventh comparison result may be replaced with the 7-1 comparison result.

[0374] The third processing unit 154 can evaluate that there is cognitive impairment in the fourth neurocognitive category, that is, perception, by generating one or more of the sixth comparison result and the seventh comparison result.

[0375] The third processing unit 154 can perform a fifth evaluation process to evaluate whether there is cognitive decline in a fifth neurocognitive category based on the first test score, the fourth test score, the tenth test score, and the eleventh test score.

[0376] When performing the fifth evaluation process, the third processing unit 154 may compare the first test score for the first test item with the first reference score, and generate an eighth comparison result when the first test score is less than the first reference score. In this embodiment, the first test score may include a fluency test score. In this embodiment, the first reference score may include a first test score of a normal group having a first Z-score of a first standard deviation (e.g., -1.5 SD).

[0377] In this embodiment, the eighth comparison result may include an 8-1 comparison result and an 8-2 comparison result. The 8-1 comparison result may be generated when the first test score is less than the first reference score. The 8-1 comparison result indicates that the user's fluency has decreased. The 8-2 comparison result may be generated when the first test score is equal to or greater than the first reference score. The 8-2 comparison result indicates that the user's fluency is good. In this embodiment, the eighth comparison result may be replaced with the 8-1 comparison result.

[0378] The third processing unit 154 may compare the fourth test score for the fourth test item with a fourth reference score, and generate a ninth comparison result when the fourth test score is less than the fourth reference score. In this embodiment, the fourth test score may include a Stroop test score. In this embodiment, the fourth reference score may include a fourth test score of a normal group having a fourth Z-score of a fourth standard deviation (e.g., -1.5 SD).

[0379] In this embodiment, the ninth comparison result may include a 9-1 comparison result and a 9-2 comparison result. The 9-1 comparison result may be generated when the fourth test score is less than the fourth reference score. The 9-1 comparison result indicates that the user's inhibitory function has deteriorated. The 9-2 comparison result may be generated when the fourth test score is equal to or greater than the fourth reference score. The 9-2 comparison result indicates that the user's inhibitory function is good. In this embodiment, the ninth comparison result may be replaced with the 9-1 comparison result.

[0380] The third processing unit 154 may compare the 10th test score for the 10th test item with the 10th reference score, and generate a 10th comparison result when the 10th test score is less than the 10th reference score. In this embodiment, the 10th test score may include a spatiotemporal attention test score. In this embodiment, the 10th reference score may include a 10th test score of a normal group in which the 10th Z-score is 10 standard deviations (e.g., -1.5 SD).

[0381] In this embodiment, the tenth comparison result may include a tenth-1 comparison result and a tenth-2 comparison result. The tenth-1 comparison result may be generated when the tenth test score is less than the tenth reference score. The tenth-1 comparison result indicates that the user's attention and working memory have decreased. The tenth-2 comparison result may be generated when the tenth test score is equal to or greater than the tenth reference score. The tenth-2 comparison result indicates that the user's attention and working memory are good. In this embodiment, the tenth comparison result may be replaced with the tenth-1 comparison result.

[0382] The third processing unit 154 may compare the 11th test score for the 11th test item with an 11th reference score, and generate an 11th comparison result when the 11th test score is less than the 11th reference score. In this embodiment, the 11th test score may include a Hayling test score. In this embodiment, the 11th reference score may include an 11th test score of a normal group in which the 11th Z-score is an 11th standard deviation (e.g., -1.5 SD).

[0383] In this embodiment, the 11th comparison result may include an 11-1 comparison result and an 11-2 comparison result. The 11-1 comparison result may be generated when the 11th test score is less than the 11th reference score. The 11-1 comparison result indicates that the user's linguistic inhibition has decreased. The 11-2 comparison result may be generated when the 11th test score is equal to or greater than the 11th reference score. The 11-2 comparison result indicates that the user's linguistic inhibition is good. In this embodiment, the 11th comparison result may be replaced with the 11-1 comparison result.

[0384] The third processing unit 154 can evaluate that there is a cognitive impairment in the fifth neurocognitive category, i.e., attention execution, by generating one or more of the eighth comparison result, the ninth comparison result, the tenth comparison result, and the eleventh comparison result.

[0385] After the execution of the discrimination process is completed, the transmission unit 155 can transmit the discrimination result to the user terminal 200 and / or a terminal (not shown) of a medical practitioner (eg, a doctor).

[0386] Fig. 16 is a block diagram for explaining the schematic configuration of an examination device for evaluating cognitive decline according to another embodiment. In the following explanation, parts that overlap with the explanations of Figs. 1 to 15 will be omitted. Referring to Fig. 16, an examination device 100 according to another embodiment can include a processor 170 and a memory 180.

[0387] In this embodiment, the processor 170 can process the functions executed by the communication unit 110, the storage medium 120, the program storage unit 130, the database 140, the search management unit 150 and the control unit 160 disclosed in FIG. 2 and FIG.

[0388] The processor 170 can control the overall operation of the inspection apparatus 100. Here, the term "processor" can refer to a data processing device implemented in hardware having a circuit physically structured to execute a function represented by a code or instruction words included in a program. Examples of such data processing devices implemented in hardware include processing devices such as a microprocessor, a central processing unit, a processor core, a multiprocessor, an ASIC, and an FPGA, but the scope of the present invention is not limited thereto.

[0389] The memory 180 is operatively connected to the processor 170 and is capable of storing at least one code related to operations to be performed by the processor 170 .

[0390] Furthermore, the memory 180 may perform a function of temporarily or permanently storing data processed by the processor 170, and may include data constructed in the database 140. Here, the memory 180 may include a magnetic storage medium or a flash storage medium, but the scope of the present invention is not limited thereto. Such memory 180 may include an internal memory and / or an external memory, and may include a storage device such as a volatile memory such as DRAM, SRAM, or SDRAM, a non-volatile memory such as OTPROM, PROM, EPROM, EEPROM, mask ROM, flash ROM, NAND flash memory, or NOR flash memory, a flash drive such as an SSD, a CF card, an SD card, a Micro-SD card, a Mini-SD card, an xD card, or a memory stick, or an HDD.

[0391] 17 to 20 are flow charts for explaining the testing method for evaluating cognitive decline according to this embodiment. In the following explanation, parts that overlap with the explanations of Figs. 1 to 16 will be omitted. The testing method for evaluating cognitive decline according to this embodiment will be explained on the assumption that the testing device 100 is executed by the processor 170 with the assistance of peripheral components.

[0392] 17, in step S1710, the processor 170 may test the degree to which the user performs the missions presented for each of the plurality of test items, and calculate a test score for each of the plurality of test items. In this embodiment, step S1710 may be expressed as a test step in the claims to be described later.

[0393] A detailed flowchart of the test step is shown in Fig. 18. Referring to Fig. 18, in step S1710-1, the processor 170 may execute a first test step of executing a test for a first test item for evaluating how well the user speaks words corresponding to a predefined presentation category within a time limit and how well the user draws a designated pattern within a time limit, and calculating a first test score.

[0394] In step S1710-2, after completing the execution of the first test step, the processor 170 can execute a second test step in which clues of a predetermined category are provided to have the learner learn words, a test is executed for a second test item that evaluates to what extent the learnt words are remembered after a predetermined time has elapsed, and a second test score is calculated.

[0395] In step S1710-3, after completing the execution of the second test step, processor 170 can execute a third test step in which a default presentation image is learned, a test is executed for a third test item that evaluates the extent to which the learned presentation image is remembered after a default time has elapsed, and a third test score is calculated.

[0396] In step S1710-4, after completing the execution of the third test step, the processor 170 can execute a test for a fourth test item that evaluates whether the predefined presentation words and the colors of the predefined presentation words are accurately pronounced, and execute a fourth test step that calculates a fourth test score.

[0397] In step S1710-5, after completing the execution of the fourth inspection step, the processor 170 can execute a fifth inspection step to perform an inspection for a fifth inspection item, which evaluates whether or not a line having a similar angle to a predetermined presentation line is found, and calculate a fifth inspection score.

[0398] In step S1710-6, after completing the execution of the fifth inspection step, processor 170 can execute a sixth inspection item inspection to evaluate whether or not a figure of a color different from the color of the default presented figure is found, and execute a sixth inspection step to calculate a sixth inspection score.

[0399] In step S1710-7, after completing the execution of the sixth inspection step, the processor 170 can execute an inspection of a seventh inspection item to evaluate whether the size and weight of the predetermined presented object are arranged in descending order, and execute a seventh inspection step to calculate a seventh inspection score.

[0400] In step S1710-8, after completing the execution of the seventh test step, processor 170 can execute a test of an eighth test item that evaluates whether or not the intensity of the emotion expressed in a default face presentation image is recognized, and execute an eighth test step that calculates an eighth test score.

[0401] In step S1710-9, after completing the execution of the eighth test step, the processor 170 can execute a ninth test step of executing a test on a ninth test item which evaluates whether a predetermined presentation sentence is spoken accurately, and calculating a ninth test score.

[0402] In step S1710-10, after completing the execution of the 9th inspection step, the processor 170 can execute a 10th inspection step to perform an inspection for a 10th inspection item that evaluates whether or not to memorize the position and order of the default presentation figures, and calculates a 10th inspection score.

[0403] In step S1710-11, after completing the execution of the tenth test step, the processor 170 can execute an eleventh test step to perform a test on an eleventh test item that evaluates whether or not a word that meets a condition is accurately selected so that a pre-presented incomplete sentence becomes a completed sentence, and to calculate an eleventh test score.

[0404] 17, in step S1720, after the execution of the test step is completed, the processor 170 can classify at least one test item among the multiple test items into one of the multiple neurocognitive categories. In this embodiment, the step S1720 can be expressed as a category classification step in the claims described below.

[0405] A detailed flowchart of the category classification step is shown in Fig. 19. Referring to Fig. 19, in step S1720-1, the processor 170 can classify the second test item and the third test item into a first neurocognitive category that can evaluate cognitive function decline for memory.

[0406] In step S1720-2, the processor 170 can classify the eighth test item into a second neurocognitive category that can evaluate cognitive decline relative to social cognition.

[0407] In step S1720-3, the processor 170 can classify the seventh test item and the ninth test item into a third neurocognitive category that can evaluate cognitive impairment for language.

[0408] In step S1720-4, the processor 170 can classify the fifth and sixth test items into a fourth neurocognitive category that can evaluate cognitive decline relative to perception.

[0409] In step S1720-5, the processor 170 can classify the first test item, the fourth test item, the tenth test item, and the eleventh test item into a fifth neurocognitive category that can evaluate cognitive impairment related to attention execution.

[0410] 17, in step S1730, after the processor 170 has completed the execution of the category classification step, the processor 170 can evaluate whether or not there is cognitive decline in the neurocognitive category based on the test scores for the test items classified into the neurocognitive category. In this embodiment, the step S1730 can be expressed as an evaluation step in the claims to be described later.

[0411] FIG. 20 shows a detailed flowchart of the evaluation step. Referring to FIG. 20, in step S1730-1, the processor 170 can execute a first evaluation process. When executing the first evaluation process, the processor 170 can compare a second test score for a second test item with a second reference score, and generate a first comparison result when the second test score is less than the second reference score. The processor 170 can compare a third test score for a third test item with a third reference score, and generate a second comparison result when the third test score is less than the third reference score. The processor 170 can evaluate that there is a cognitive decline in the first neurocognitive category, i.e., memory, when one or more of the first comparison result and the second comparison result are generated.

[0412] When evaluating whether there is a cognitive decline in memory, by using only the second and / or third test items out of the first to eleventh test items, it is possible to calculate the evaluation results using fewer computer resources and at a higher processing speed compared to the resources and processing speed required when executing all of the first to eleventh test items, thereby improving the accuracy and reliability of the cognitive decline evaluation.

[0413] In step S1730-2, the processor 170 can execute a second evaluation process. When executing the second evaluation process, the processor 170 can compare an eighth test score for an eighth test item with an eighth reference score, and generate a third comparison result when the eighth test score is less than the eighth reference score. When the third comparison result is generated, the processor 170 can evaluate that there is a cognitive decline in the second neurocognitive category, i.e., social cognition.

[0414] When assessing whether there is cognitive decline in social cognition, by using only test item 8 of test items 1 to 11, it is possible to calculate the assessment results using fewer computer resources and at a higher processing speed compared to the resources and processing speed required when executing all of test items 1 to 11, thereby improving the accuracy and reliability of the cognitive decline assessment.

[0415] In step S1730-3, the processor 170 can execute a third evaluation process. When executing the third evaluation process, the processor 170 can compare the seventh test score for the seventh test item with the seventh reference score, and generate a fourth comparison result when the seventh test score is less than the seventh reference score. The processor 170 can compare the ninth test score for the ninth test item with the ninth reference score, and generate a fifth comparison result when the ninth test score is less than the ninth reference score. The processor 170 can evaluate that there is a cognitive impairment in the third neurocognitive category, i.e., language, when one or more of the fourth comparison result and the fifth comparison result are generated.

[0416] When assessing whether cognitive decline in language exists, by using only test item 7 and / or test item 9 of test items 1 to 11, it is possible to calculate the assessment results using fewer computer resources and at a higher processing speed compared to the resources and processing speed required when performing all of test items 1 to 11, thereby improving the accuracy and reliability of the cognitive decline assessment.

[0417] In step S1730-4, the processor 170 can execute a fourth evaluation process. When executing the fourth evaluation process, the processor 170 can compare the fifth test score for the fifth test item with the fifth reference score, and generate a sixth comparison result when the fifth test score is less than the fifth reference score. The processor 170 can compare the sixth test score for the sixth test item with the sixth reference score, and generate a seventh comparison result when the sixth test score is less than the sixth reference score. The processor 170 can evaluate that there is a cognitive decline in the fourth neurocognitive category, i.e., perception, when one or more of the sixth comparison result and the seventh comparison result are generated.

[0418] When evaluating whether there is cognitive decline in perception, by using only the fifth and / or sixth test items out of the first to eleventh test items, it is possible to calculate the evaluation results using fewer computer resources and at a higher processing speed compared to the resources and processing speed required when executing all of the first to eleventh test items, thereby improving the accuracy and reliability of the cognitive decline evaluation.

[0419] In step S1730-5, the processor 170 can execute a fifth evaluation process. When executing the fifth evaluation process, the processor 170 can compare the first inspection score for the first inspection item with the first reference score and generate an eighth comparison result when the first inspection score is less than the first reference score. The processor 170 can compare the fourth inspection score for the fourth inspection item with the fourth reference score and generate a ninth comparison result when the fourth inspection score is less than the fourth reference score. The processor 170 can compare the tenth inspection score for the tenth inspection item with the tenth reference score and generate a tenth comparison result when the tenth inspection score is less than the tenth reference score. The processor 170 can compare the eleventh inspection score for the eleventh inspection item with the eleventh reference score and generate an eleventh comparison result when the eleventh inspection score is less than the eleventh reference score. The processor 170 can assess that there is cognitive impairment in the fifth neurocognitive category, i.e., attention executive, by generating one or more of the eighth comparison result, the ninth comparison result, the tenth comparison result, and the eleventh comparison result.

[0420] When evaluating whether there is a cognitive decline in attention execution, by using only test item 1, test item 4, test item 10, and / or test item 11 of test items 1 to 11, it is possible to calculate the evaluation results using fewer computer resources and at a higher processing speed compared to the resources and processing speed required when performing all of test items 1 to 11, thereby improving the accuracy and reliability of the cognitive decline evaluation.

[0421] The above-described embodiments of the present invention may be implemented in the form of a computer program that can be executed by various components on a computer, and such a computer program may be recorded on a computer-readable medium, which may include magnetic media such as hard disks, floppy disks, and magnetic tapes, optical recording media such as CD-ROMs and DVDs, magneto-optical media such as floptical disks, and hardware devices specially configured to store and execute program instructions, such as ROMs, RAMs, flash memories, etc.

[0422] Meanwhile, the computer program may be one specially designed and constructed for the present invention, or one that is well known and available to those skilled in the art of computer software. Examples of computer programs include not only machine code, such as that produced by a compiler, but also high-level language code that can be executed by a computer using an interpreter, etc.

[0423] In the present specification (particularly in the claims), the use of the term "said" and similar indicators may apply to both the singular and the plural. In addition, when a range is described in the present invention, it is considered to include inventions to which individual values ​​within the range are applied (unless otherwise stated), as if each individual value constituting the range was described in the detailed description of the invention.

[0424] Unless otherwise clearly stated or contrary to the order of steps constituting the method of the present invention, the steps may be performed in any suitable order. The present invention is not necessarily limited to the order of steps. In the present invention, the use of all examples or exemplary terms (such as, for example, etc.) is merely for the purpose of explaining the present invention in detail, and the scope of the present invention is not limited by the examples or exemplary terms unless limited by the claims. Furthermore, those skilled in the art will understand that various modifications, combinations and changes can be made according to design conditions and factors within the scope of the appended claims or their equivalents.

[0425] Therefore, the concept of the present invention should not be limited to the above-described embodiments, and all scopes equivalent to or equivalently modified from the scope of the claims, as well as the scope of the claims described below, fall within the scope of the concept of the present invention.

Claims

1. As a test method for evaluating cognitive decline executed by a processor of a test device for evaluating cognitive decline, a test step of testing the user to see how well the user accomplishes a mission presented for each of a plurality of test items and calculating a test score for each of the plurality of test items; a categorization step of categorizing at least one test item among the plurality of test items into one neurocognitive category among a plurality of neurocognitive categories based on a type of the test item; and an evaluation step of evaluating whether or not there is a cognitive decline in the neurocognitive category based on the test scores for the test items classified into the neurocognitive category, The inspection step includes: a second test step of: providing clues of a predetermined category to the user to learn words; executing a test for a second test item to evaluate how well the user remembers the learned words after a predetermined time has elapsed; and calculating a second test score; The second inspection step includes: 2-1 inspection step; A second-2 inspection step that is executed after the second-1 inspection step is completed and a predetermined time has elapsed; The 2-1 inspection step includes: providing a second-1-1 instruction sentence for presenting a plurality of suggested words and for instructing the user to select a word from the plurality of suggested words that corresponds to a clue of the predetermined category; receiving a word selection result in which one of the plurality of suggested words is selected in response to the 2-1-1 instruction sentence; and calculating a second-first-first test score by comparing the word selection result with a correct answer word. Testing methods for assessing cognitive decline.

2. After the step of calculating the number of inspection points 2-1-1, providing a second-1-2 instruction sentence that does not provide options for the plurality of presented words, but reproduces and speaks a word that belongs to the clue of the predetermined category among the plurality of presented words previously shown; receiving a speech result for a word belonging to the clue of the predetermined category in response to the 2-1-2 instruction sentence, converting the speech result into a speech text, and calculating a 2-1-2 test score by comparing the speech text with a correct answer text; and calculating a 2-1 inspection score by summing the 2-1-1 inspection score and the 2-1-2 inspection score. The method for evaluating cognitive decline according to claim 1.

3. The second-2 inspection step includes: providing a second-2-1 instruction sentence for reproducing and uttering a presentation word corresponding to a clue of the category among the plurality of presentation words presented during execution of the second-1 inspection step; receiving a speech result for a presented word corresponding to a clue of the category among the plurality of presented words seen during execution of the 2-1 test step in response to the 2-2-1 instruction sentence, converting the speech result into a spoken text, and calculating a 2-2-1 test score by comparing the spoken text with a correct answer text; providing a second-2-2 instruction sentence together with a predefined suggested word, allowing the user to select whether the predefined suggested word is a word seen in a previous test; A step of selecting whether the predetermined presented word is a word seen in a previous test in response to the 2-2-2 instruction sentence and comparing the result with a correct answer word to calculate a 2-2-2 test score; and calculating a 2-2 inspection score by summing the 2-2-1 inspection score and the 2-2-2 inspection score. The method for evaluating cognitive decline according to claim 1.

4. Before the 2-1 inspection step, Further comprising a step of providing a method for performing the second-1st inspection step in a text form; Before the second-2 inspection step, Further comprising a step of providing a method for performing the second-2nd inspection step in text form; The method for evaluating cognitive decline according to claim 1.

5. The inspection step includes: a fourth test step of executing a test for a fourth test item for evaluating whether a predetermined presentation word and a color of the predetermined presentation word are accurately pronounced, and calculating a fourth test score; The fourth inspection step includes: 4-1 inspection step; A 4-2 inspection step that is executed upon completion of the 4-1 inspection step; The method for evaluating cognitive decline according to claim 1.

6. The 4-1 inspection step includes: providing a fourth-1 instruction sentence for displaying the predetermined suggested word and two selected words and prompting the user to select a word that is the same as the predetermined suggested word from among the two selected words; receiving a result of selecting a word that is the same as the predetermined presented word from among the two selected words in response to the 4-1 instruction sentence, and comparing the selected result with a correct answer to calculate a 4-1 test score; The method for evaluating cognitive decline according to claim 5.

7. The 4-2 inspection step includes: providing a fourth-2 instruction sentence for displaying the predetermined presentation word and two color-selected words and prompting the user to select a word having the same color as the predetermined presentation word from among the two color-selected words; receiving a result of selecting a word having the same color as the predetermined presented word from among the two color-selected words in response to the 4-2 instruction sentence, and comparing the selected result with a correct answer to calculate a 4-2 test score; The method for evaluating cognitive decline according to claim 6.

8. Before the 4-1 inspection step, The method further includes providing a method for performing the 4-1 test step in a text and performing a practice test for the 4-1 test step; Before the 4-2 inspection step, The method for performing the 4-2 test step is provided in a text, and a practice test for the 4-2 test step is further included. The method for evaluating cognitive decline according to claim 5.

9. A computer-readable recording medium storing a computer program for causing a computer to execute the method according to claim 1.

10. As a testing device for assessing cognitive decline, A processor; a memory operatively connected to the processor and configured to store at least one code for execution by the processor; The memory, when executed via the processor, executes a test process in which the processor tests how well the user accomplishes a mission presented for each of a plurality of test items and calculates a test score for each of the plurality of test items; A category classification process is carried out to classify at least one test item among the plurality of test items into one neurocognitive category among a plurality of neurocognitive categories based on the type of the test item; storing a code for executing an evaluation process for evaluating whether or not there is cognitive impairment in the neurocognitive category based on test scores for the test items classified into the neurocognitive category; The memory is connected to the processor. a code for executing a second test process in which, when the test process is executed, clues of a predetermined category are given to learn words, a test is executed for a second test item that evaluates how well the learned words are remembered after a predetermined time has elapsed, and a second test score is calculated; storing a code such that the second inspection process includes a second-first inspection process and a second-second inspection process that is executed after the second-first inspection process is completed and a predetermined time has elapsed; The memory is connected to the processor. providing a 2-1-1 instruction sentence for displaying a plurality of suggested words and selecting a word corresponding to a clue of the predetermined category from among the plurality of suggested words when the 2-1 inspection process is performed; receiving a word selection result in which one of the plurality of suggested words is selected in response to the 2-1-1 instruction sentence; storing code for comparing the word selection result with a correct answer word to calculate a 2-1-1 test score; A testing device for assessing cognitive decline.

Images