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 5H 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 6H 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 7K 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 8H 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 9O 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 10G 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 11U 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 12N 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 13I 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 14G 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 15J 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 illustrating the testing method for evaluating cognitive decline according to this embodiment. [Figure 18] FIG. 18 is a flowchart for explaining the testing method for evaluating cognitive decline according to this embodiment. [Figure 19] FIG. 19 is a flowchart for explaining 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 a tenth 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] Fluency tests can be performed to measure cognitive flexibility, which is a component of executive function. Fluency tests can be said to be tests that evaluate the degree to which cognitive flexibility is naturally calculated within a limited time. Fluency tests can include verbal fluency tests, in which category and spelling tasks are given and participants are asked to calculate as many words as possible within a given time, and visual-perceptual fluency tests, in which participants are asked to connect given dots to draw as many shapes as possible. Verbal fluency requires both language and executive function, and patients with frontotemporal dementia and progressive non-fluent aphasia tend to often show significant impairment in both verbal fluency and tasks of both types.

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

[0029] The fluency test included in the first test process according to the present embodiment may be different from a conventional fluency test in the following respects: In the conventional fluency test, an examiner writes down words spoken by a user on a test paper. Meanwhile, in the fluency test according to the present embodiment, a voice recognition module (not shown) is used to record what the user speaks, converts it into text in real time, and then a fluency evaluation model is applied based on the recorded content to evaluate the user's language fluency level. Weighting is applied in the process of converting to text using the voice recognition module, so that the user's response can be prevented from being inaccurately converted into text. The words to which the user must respond are words that fall into a certain category, such as animals, fruits, clothes, etc., and any category is possible as long as it includes multiple noun words.

[0030] The scoring process and interpretation of the fluency test included in the first test process are as follows. The number of words responded to during a first predetermined time (e.g., 30 seconds) can be used as a score. Not only the total number of words uttered during the first predetermined time, but also the number of words responded to during a second predetermined time (various times such as 5 seconds) can be counted and scored. A first weight can be assigned to the number of words responded to in the early part of the first predetermined time (e.g., from 0 to 15 seconds) and a second weight can be assigned to the number of words responded to in the later part of the first predetermined time (e.g., from 16 to 30 seconds). Here, the first weight can be generated by multiplying the number of words responded to by a first value (e.g., 2), and the first value is not fixed to 2 but can be any one of numbers between 1.5 and 2. Additionally, the second weighting may be generated by multiplying the number of responded words by a second value (e.g., 1.5), where the second value is not fixed at 1.5 but may be any number between 1.5 and 2.

[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 or pictures; executing a test for a second test item that evaluates how well the learned words or pictures 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] Long-term memories, including episodic memories, can be formed through the processes of 1) memorization or encoding, 2) storage and retention, and 3) recall. Memory assessment can ascertain whether episodic memories are damaged, the extent of damage, or the characteristics of damage based on a detailed and comprehensive evaluation of these three steps. Memory function can be accurately ascertained by determining whether there is a recall failure or a memory strategy problem through a language cue memory test. Furthermore, the language cue memory test can have diagnostic value in identifying the type of dementia.

[0033] In this embodiment, the second inspection process may include a 2-1 inspection process and a 2-2 inspection process.

[0034] The 2-1 test process may include a process of performing a test for a 2-1 test item that evaluates the degree to which an ability to learn a word or picture is performed by providing a clue 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 performing a learning test of a language cue memory test on a user, and calculating a 2-1 test score.

[0035] 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, another inspection process 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 after the execution of the 2-1 inspection process is completed and a third inspection process is executed.

[0036] 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 or pictures 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 recognition test in the language cue memory test. Thus, the 2-2 test process may include a process of executing a recognition test in the language cue memory test for the user, and calculating a 2-2 test score.

[0037] 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.

[0038] 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 can be said to be a test in which a number of words or pictures are called out and the number of words recalled is checked. 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.

[0039] 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.

[0040] In this embodiment, the language cue memory test included in the second test process can be developed into a word interference memory test. The word interference memory test can be said to be a language memory test that measures recent memory based on a list-learning paradigm. The list-learning paradigm is a paradigm that is widely used in recent memory evaluation, and can usually be configured as a procedure of memorizing a series of word lists and recognizing or recalling them. The word interference memory test can measure the ability to recognize learned words (maximum learning amount) after first presenting an initial word list (list A, hereinafter referred to as the first list). Next, a new word list (list B, hereinafter referred to as the second list) that is semantically associated with the initial word list (list A) can be presented to measure the ability to recognize newly learned words (interference suppression). When learning and recalling the second list, the first list learned in the previous step causes semantic interference and affects the performance of the word interference memory test, which can be called proactive semantic interference. Proactive semantic interference is understood to be caused by problems in memory storage and presentation processes characteristic of Alzheimer's dementia, and is known as an important cognitive marker to predict very early Alzheimer's dementia. Word interference memory tests can be configured to sensitively detect memory problems that may appear in early Alzheimer's dementia by measuring the ability to inhibit proactive semantic interference and distinguish new information, along with the maximum amount of learning.

[0041] The conventional test LASSI-L (Loewenstein-Acevedo Scales for Semantic Interference and Learning) recalls a total of 15 words that fall into one of three semantic categories. However, the word interference memory test according to the present embodiment reduces the number of words to be memorized to a total of eight, taking into consideration the overall educational background and daily functional level of Korean elderly people. In addition, the concept of a shopping list and a shopping basket, which are familiar to Korean elderly people, is applied, and the test is composed of familiar and specific words. Furthermore, in order to facilitate scoring and scoring in a digital environment, a recognition paradigm (a method in which the presented word is seen and judged to be a memorized word) is applied, instead of the recall paradigm (a method in which the word to be memorized is directly recalled and spoken) used in the conventional test. In addition, the word in the first list is presented as a non-target word to be eliminated when recognizing the second list, so that proactive semantic interference can be measured even within the recognition paradigm.

[0042] The scoring process and interpretation of the word interference memory test are as follows. First, the recognition score for the first list, the number of correct "yes" (true positive) responses, and the number of correct "no" (true negative) responses can be calculated. Here, the recognition score is an embodiment, and can be calculated by subtracting a reference value (e.g., 4) from the total value of the number of correct "yes" (true positive) responses and the number of correct "no" (true negative) responses. Second, the recognition score for the second list, the number of correct "yes" (true positive) responses, the number of correct "no" (true negative) responses, and the number of false positive errors can be calculated. Third, the total time required for the word interference memory test can be calculated. As a result of scoring the word interference memory test, it can be evaluated that the higher the overall recognition score, the better the linguistic recent memory ability. It can be evaluated that the higher the recognition score for the first list, the higher the maximum linguistic memory ability that can be learned. It can be evaluated that the higher the recognition score for the second list, the better the ability to suppress proactive interference. A higher number of false positive errors for the second list can be interpreted as a greater vulnerability to the effects of proactive semantic interference.

[0043] The third test process may be executed after the execution of the 2-1 test process is completed. The third test process may include a process of executing a test for a third test item that evaluates how accurately and quickly a user can select an arbitrary number that matches the presented symbol image within a predetermined time limit (e.g., 45 seconds) by looking at a presented symbol image, and calculating a third test score. Here, the third test item may include a symbol-digit matching test. Thus, the third test process may include a process of executing a symbol-digit matching test on a user and calculating a third test score.

[0044] Processing speed, which belongs to executive function, can be evaluated by scanning visual information quickly and accurately, guessing the order, and identifying it. The symbol-digit matching test according to the present embodiment can measure visual-motor processing speed, short-term visual memory learning ability, cognitive flexibility, attention, concentration, and synchronization. The symbol-digit matching test is a test in which a subject must look at a symbol displayed in the center of the screen, find a number connected to the symbol on the number board at the bottom of the screen, and touch it. A total of n symbols are displayed alternately in the center of the screen, and a number presented at the bottom of the screen is connected to one symbol.

[0045] The differences between the symbol-digit matching test included in the third test process according to the present embodiment and the conventional symbol-digit writing test can be as follows. The conventional symbol-digit matching test is performed using a paper-pen test method, in which a number-symbol table connected to the top of a piece of paper is looked at, and a symbol that matches the corresponding number is handwritten in the blank space below the number written in the response section at the bottom. The symbol-digit matching test according to the present embodiment is a method in which one of the symbols in the symbol set is displayed in the center of the screen, and the number that matches the symbol is touched in the response section below which the number-symbol is connected. The method of generating the symbol set displayed in the center of the screen is as follows. The symbol can be generated by a combination of four vertices that can be generated in the shape of a square, and all straight lines and curves that pass through half the positions of the four vertices. The conventional symbol-digit writing test requires writing ability because an answer is written using a writing implement. However, the symbol-digit matching test according to the present embodiment can focus on the function of processing visual information. The symbols used in the symbol-digit matching test according to the present embodiment cannot be verbalized in consideration of the copyright of existing symbols, and a newly created simple form of symbol can be applied. In the early questions, the difficulty level can be increased by configuring the player to select symbols that are close to each other, while in the later questions, the difficulty level can be increased by configuring the player to search for all symbols.

[0046] The scoring process and interpretation of the symbol-digit matching test included in the third test process are as follows: Indicators used for scoring include 1) the number of numbers touched within a given time, 2) the number of times numbers connected to symbols displayed in the center of the screen were touched within a given time, 3) the number of times numbers not connected to symbols displayed in the center of the screen were touched within a given time, and 4) the average time and standard deviation required to touch each number button.

[0047] The fourth test process can be executed after the execution of the 2-2 test process is completed. The fourth test process can include a process of learning a predetermined presented image, executing a test for a fourth 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 fourth test score. Here, the fourth test item can include a visual schematic memory test.

[0048] The Free and Cued Selective Reminding Test developed by Buschke (1984) is a verbal memory test that provides category cues related to words, generates associations for recall during the learning process, and utilizes them during recall. Conventional memory tests based on free recall tasks cannot distinguish between a decrease in efficiency due to the use of inefficient strategies in the memory process and a decrease in processing capacity, and memory storage disorders due to damage to memory structures. In addition, poor performance in free recall tasks is not a characteristic of dementia, but similar results can be observed in aging and depression. However, damage in cued recall tasks can be more characteristic of the early diagnosis of Alzheimer's dementia. Only when the learning process, which is the encoding step, includes a process of categorizing multiple words into a single semantic cluster and instantly recalling it can prevent a decrease in the efficiency of the encoding process and detect the problem of memory decline itself due to abnormalities in memory structures. Most memory tests using such cued recall tasks use word stimuli and semantic cues. However, picture stimuli can evaluate the patient's visual perception ability and are more familiar and approachable for illiterate elderly people than word stimuli. In the visual schematic memory test according to the present embodiment, a visual-verbal memory task is constructed using a picture stimulus, and the efficiency of memory is improved by using the picture stimulus and a picture cue. As a result of the study, the immediate free recall in the visual schematic memory test according to the present embodiment is a task that effectively distinguishes three groups, normal, mild cognitive impairment, and Alzheimer's dementia, and the learning task is the best at distinguishing Lewy body dementia from other groups with the attribute of visual recognition. In the visual schematic memory test according to the present embodiment, the difference between each group is well expressed in sub-tests such as learning, immediate cue recall, and immediate free recall, which are more influenced by encoding than by memory storage or retention.

[0049] In this embodiment, the fourth inspection process may include a 4-1 inspection process and a 4-2 inspection process.

[0050] The 4-1 test process can be executed after the 2-2 test process is completed. The 4-1 test process can include a process of executing a test for the 4-1 test item that presents a predetermined first presented image, inputting a visual perception stimulus through a process of grasping the number of colors in the first presented image, and calculating a 4-1 test score. Here, the 4-1 test item can include a learning test among visual schematic memory tests. Thus, the 3-1 test process can include a process of executing a learning test among visual schematic memory tests for a user, and calculating a 4-1 test score.

[0051] The 4-2 inspection process can be executed after the execution of the 4-1 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 4-2 inspection process after the execution of the 4-1 inspection process is completed, the 4-2 inspection process can be executed only after the 5th inspection process to the 7th inspection process are executed. In this embodiment, the execution procedure of the inspection process can be as follows. First, the 1st inspection process is executed, then the 2-1 inspection process is executed, then the 3rd inspection process is executed, then the 2-2 inspection process is executed, then the 4-1 inspection process is executed, then the 5th inspection process to the 7th inspection process are executed in sequence, then the 4-2 inspection process is executed, then the 3-2 inspection process is executed, and then the 8th inspection process to the 10th inspection process are executed in sequence.

[0052] In the present embodiment, the 2-2 inspection process is necessarily executed after the 3rd inspection process is completed, and the 4-2 inspection process is necessarily executed after the 7th inspection process is completed, but this is not limited thereto. That is, the 2-2 inspection process and the 4-2 inspection process can be executed after any one of the 3rd process to the 10th inspection process is completed.

[0053] The 4-2 test process may include a process of executing a test for a 4-2 test item that evaluates the degree to which the presented image learned in the 4-1 test process is remembered after a predetermined time has elapsed, and calculating a 4-2 test score. Here, the 4-2 test item may include a recognition test in the visual schematic memory test. Thus, the 4-2 test process may include a process of executing a recognition test in the visual schematic memory test for the user, and calculating a 4-2 test score.

[0054] The differences between the visual schematic memory test included in the fourth 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.

[0055] The fifth test process can be executed after the execution of the fourth-first test process is completed. The fifth test process can include a process of executing a test for a fifth test item for evaluating whether a predetermined presented word and a color of the predetermined presented word are accurately pronounced, and calculating a fifth test score. Here, the fifth test item can include a Stroop test.

[0056] The Stroop test can measure the ability to inhibit responses unrelated to the target response and maintain the goal. The Stroop test shows a significant difference in the test performance ability between dementia patients and normal elderly people, and can be an effective indicator for distinguishing dementia patients from normal elderly people.

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

[0058] The 5-1 test process may include a process of executing a test for a 5-1 test item that evaluates whether a predetermined word is correctly uttered, and calculating a 5-1 test score. Here, the 5-1 test item may include a first Stroop test. Thus, the 5-1 process may include a process of executing the first Stroop test on the user, and calculating a 5-1 test score.

[0059] The 5-2 test process may include a process of executing a test for a 5-2 test item that evaluates whether or not the color of a predetermined presented word is accurately pronounced, and calculating a 5-2 test score. Here, the 5-2 test item may include a second Stroop test. Thus, the 5-2 process may include a process of executing the second Stroop test on the user, and calculating a 5-2 test score.

[0060] The Stroop test included in the fifth 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.

[0061] The sixth test process can be executed after the fifth test process is completed. The sixth test process can include a process of executing a test for a sixth test item that evaluates whether or not an emotional state shown in a predetermined face presentation image is recognized, and calculating a sixth test score. Here, the sixth test item can include a facial emotion test. Thus, the sixth test process can include a process of executing a facial emotion test on a user, and calculating a sixth test score.

[0062] In general, dementia patients may have emotional recognition disorders due to changes in cognitive function. In addition, dementia patients may have difficulty in exchanging emotions with others compared to healthy people, and may also have a decreased ability to empathize in interpersonal relationships. In particular, frontotemporal dementia (FTD) may show behavioral changes in interpersonal relationships, such as apathy, errors in social processing, and impaired social recognition. In addition, frontotemporal dementia may have a decreased ability to recognize facial emotions compared to normal groups. In contrast, the face identification test according to this embodiment provides multiple first face presentation images containing six basic emotions (happy, scared, sad, angry, bitter, and surprised) and multiple second face presentation images containing no emotions, i.e., emotionless, to check whether the patient is sensitive to the emotions contained in each facial expression.

[0063] The differences between the facial emotion test included in the sixth testing process according to the present embodiment and the conventional facial emotion test are as follows: The conventional facial identification test is a method of finding an accurate emotion by looking at a photograph of a facial expression. However, the facial identification test according to the present embodiment can present the intensity of emotions in stages and evaluate the corresponding emotion. In addition, the facial emotion test can distinguish between weak emotions and strong emotions, and can settle the difference between positive emotions and negative emotions. In addition, the contrast calculated by the facial identification test can be said to be useful for distinguishing between major depressive disorder and FTD. The facial identification test can present stimuli with a balanced male / female ratio to eliminate gender bias for stimuli.

[0064] The seventh test process can be executed after the sixth test process is completed. The seventh test process can include a process of executing a test for a seventh test item that evaluates how accurately and quickly a user can select a number presented within a predetermined time limit, and how accurately and quickly a user can select a day of the week corresponding to the number when a number and a day of the week are presented, and calculating a seventh test score. Here, the seventh test item can include a trail making test.

[0065] The Trail Making Test may be a test created to evaluate visual concepts and visual motor skills. The Trail Making Test may include a number-connecting test and a number-alphabet connecting test. Here, the number-alphabet connecting test is a test in which a line is drawn to connect circles marked with numbers or letters of the alphabet, alternating in order of their respective orders. The Trail Making Test may comprehensively require visual perception ability, visual search, motor speed, complex visual scanning, agility, etc. In addition, the number-alphabet connecting test may require cognitive function conversion such as set switching ability, retrograde inhibition, and the ability to maintain two types of parallel thinking.

[0066] In this embodiment, the seventh inspection process may include a 7-1 inspection process and a 7-2 inspection process.

[0067] The 7-1 test process may include a process of selecting an arbitrary number indicated as "start" within the 7-1 time limit, executing a test for a 7-1 test item that evaluates how accurately and quickly the user selects other presented numbers in descending or ascending order, and calculating a 7-1 test score. Here, the 7-1 test item may include a number linking test. Thus, the 7-1 test process may include a process of executing a linguistic number linking test on the user to calculate a 7-1 test score.

[0068] The 7-2 test process may include a process of presenting a number and a day of the week, performing a test on a 7-2 test item that evaluates how accurately and quickly the user selects the day of the week corresponding to the number within a 7-2 time limit, and calculating a 7-2 test score. Here, the 7-2 test item may include a number-day of the week linking test. Thus, the 7-2 test process may include a process of performing a pattern number-day of the week linking test on the user to calculate a 7-2 test score.

[0069] The Trail Making Test in this embodiment differs from conventional Trail Making Tests in that, taking into account the characteristics of Korean elderly people, the Korean version of the Trail Making Test for the Elderly was developed as a digital version by replacing the alphabet with familiar days of the week (Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday, Friday, Saturday, Sunday).

[0070] The eighth inspection process may be executed after the fourth-2 inspection process is completed. The eighth inspection process may execute an inspection for an eighth inspection item, which evaluates whether the sizes of the predetermined presented objects are arranged in descending or ascending order, and calculate an eighth inspection score. Here, the eighth inspection item may include a size and weight inspection.

[0071] The size and weight test is a linguistic test that evaluates semantic memory by presenting three animals and three objects and arranging each stimulus by size and weight. The size and weight test was developed into a Korean version by modifying the animal and object stimuli to make them familiar to Korean elderly people, and the validity of the test was evaluated. As a result of the study, the test score showed a significant difference between the normal group and Alzheimer's disease dementia (AD), making it possible to distinguish between the two groups. In addition, the test score showed a significant difference between Alzheimer's disease dementia and semantic primary progressive aphasia (SV-PPA), making it possible to distinguish between the two clinical groups. The results of brain imaging of SV-PPA patients showed a significant correlation between the volume of gray matter in the right inferior frontal cortex and bilateral temporal cortices, which are brain areas involved in recalling semantic information, and the test score.

[0072] In this embodiment, the eighth inspection process may include an 8-1 inspection process and an 8-2 inspection process.

[0073] The 8-1 inspection process can execute an inspection for an 8-1 inspection item that evaluates whether the sizes of the predetermined presented objects are arranged in descending or ascending order, and calculate an 8-1 inspection score. Here, the 8-1 inspection item can include a size inspection. Thus, the 8-1 inspection process can include a process of executing a size inspection on the user as a target, and calculating an 8-1 inspection score.

[0074] The 8-2 inspection process can perform an inspection for an 8-2 inspection item that evaluates whether the weights of a predetermined presented object are arranged in descending or ascending order, and calculate an 8-2 inspection score. Here, the 8-2 inspection item can include a weight inspection. Thus, the 8-2 inspection process can include a process of performing a weight inspection on a user and calculating an 8-2 inspection score.

[0075] The size and weight inspection included in the eighth inspection process according to the present embodiment may be different from the conventional size and weight inspection in the following points. In the size and weight inspection according to the present embodiment, objects according to size and objects according to weight are 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.

[0076] The ninth test process may be executed after the eighth test process is completed. The ninth test process may include a process of providing an arbitrary image and a narration for the arbitrary image, executing a test for a ninth test item that evaluates the understanding of a social situation based on a collected result of correct responses to a question after the provision of the narration is completed, and calculating a ninth test score. Here, the ninth test item may include a theory of mind test. Thus, the ninth test process may include a process of executing a theory of mind test on a user and calculating a ninth test score.

[0077] Social cognition is the ability to perceive, interpret, and process social information that we are constantly exposed to in our daily lives. Theory of mind refers to the ability to decipher or infer the mental states of others, such as their beliefs, needs, and intentions, allowing us to understand others and predict their behavior. Theory of mind tests can be composed of cognitive and affective aspects. Theory of mind tests can be constructed to assess the ability to understand and deal with social situations based on theory of mind.

[0078] The difference between the theory of mind test included in the ninth testing process according to this embodiment and the conventional picture arrangement test can be as follows. The conventional picture arrangement test (WAIS-R) is a test to check whether a social situation is understood by arranging given pictures in order according to the flow of a story. However, the conventional picture arrangement test is difficult for elderly people and is difficult to carry out. Therefore, the theory of mind test according to this embodiment can be configured by modifying the story to be friendly to elderly people and asking about the degree of understanding of the intentions of people and social situations from the content presented in each scene and the emotions of people.

[0079] The tenth inspection process can be executed after the execution of the ninth inspection process is completed. The tenth inspection process can include a process of executing an inspection for a tenth 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 tenth inspection score. Here, the tenth inspection item can include a color perception test. Thus, the tenth inspection process can include a process of executing a color perception test on a user, and calculating a tenth inspection score.

[0080] The differences between the color perception test included in the tenth test process according to the present embodiment and the conventional color perception test may be as follows. The Farnsworth Munsell 100 hue test as a conventional color perception test arranges similar colors into four color regions based on 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 may 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 may be configured by selecting two colors, rather than arranging all colors as in the conventional test, and setting the difficulty level high for those with small color differences and low for those with large color differences.

[0081] After completing the first to tenth 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.

[0082] The testing device 100 can classify the second test item (verbal cue memory test) and the fourth test item (visual schematic memory test) into a first neurocognitive category that can evaluate cognitive function decline relative to memory ability.

[0083] The testing device 100 can classify the sixth test item (facial emotion test) and the ninth test item (theory of mind test) into a second neurocognitive category that can distinguish neurocognitive disorders in social cognition.

[0084] The testing device 100 can classify the eighth test item (size and weight test) into the third neurocognitive category, which can evaluate cognitive function decline for language.

[0085] The testing device 100 can classify the tenth test item (color perception test) into the fourth neurocognitive category, which can evaluate cognitive function decline with respect to perception.

[0086] The testing device 100 can classify the first test item (fluency test), the third test item (symbol-digit matching test), the fifth test item (Stroop test), and the seventh test item (trail making test) into a fifth neurocognitive category that can evaluate cognitive function decline related to attention execution.

[0087] 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.

[0088] 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 fourth test score (visual schematic memory test score).

[0089] The testing device 100 can perform a second evaluation process to evaluate whether there is cognitive impairment for a second neurocognitive category as social cognition based on the sixth test score (facial emotion test score) and the ninth test score (theory of mind test score).

[0090] The testing device 100 can perform a third evaluation process to evaluate whether or not there is cognitive decline for a third neurocognitive category, such as language, based on the eighth test score (size and weight test score).

[0091] The testing device 100 can perform a fourth evaluation process to evaluate whether or not there is cognitive impairment for a fourth neurocognitive category as perception based on the tenth test score (color perception test score).

[0092] The testing device 100 can perform a fifth evaluation process to evaluate whether or not there is cognitive impairment for a fifth neurocognitive category as attention executive based on the first test score (fluency test score), the third test score (symbol-digit matching test score), the fifth test score (Stroop test score) and the seventh test score (trail making test score).

[0093] 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.

[0094] 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.

[0095] 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.

[0096] 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.

[0097] 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.

[0098] 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.

[0099] 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.

[0100] 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.

[0101] 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, SRAM, or 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.

[0102] 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.

[0103] 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 tenth 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.

[0104] In addition, the management database may store correct answers corresponding to the instructions described below. For example, the management database may store a correct answer text corresponding to the first instruction, a correct answer word or picture corresponding to the 2-1 instruction, a correct answer word or picture corresponding to the 2-2 instruction, a correct answer corresponding to the 3rd instruction, a correct answer corresponding to the 4-1 instruction and the 4-2 instruction, a correct answer corresponding to the 5-1 and the 5-2 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 8-1 and the 8-2 instruction, a correct answer corresponding to the 9th instruction, and a correct answer corresponding to the 10th instruction.

[0105] 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.

[0106] 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.

[0107] 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.

[0108] In the first step, the first to tenth 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 tenth test processes on the normal group, the first to tenth test scores of the normal group may be calculated.

[0109] In the second process, the first to tenth average values ​​and the first to tenth standard deviations can be calculated for the first to tenth test scores of the normal group.

[0110] In the third step, at least one of the first to tenth test items for the normal group can be classified into one of the first to fifth neurocognitive categories. The second and fourth test items for the normal group can be classified into the first neurocognitive category, the sixth and ninth test items for the normal group can be classified into the second neurocognitive category, the eighth test item for the normal group can be classified into the third neurocognitive category, the tenth test item for the normal group can be classified into the fourth neurocognitive category, and the first, third, fifth and seventh test items for the normal group can be classified into the fifth neurocognitive category.

[0111] In the fourth step, the first to tenth Z-scores can be calculated using the first to tenth average values ​​and the first to tenth standard deviations for the first to tenth test scores. Here, the Z-score can be said to be a score that indicates how far the test score is from the average value when viewed in units of standard deviation.

[0112] 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 tenth reference scores. In this embodiment, the Z-score can also include the first to tenth Z-scores.

[0113] 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 tenth standards.

[0114] 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.

[0115] In the past, the process of testing a large number of subjects and collecting the result scores to calculate the benchmark score required a lot of manpower and time, and even when new results were generated, it took a long time for the new results to be reflected in the benchmark score.

[0116] Meanwhile, in the present embodiment, test results collected in real time are stored in the database 140 and the reference score is updated instantly, so that the latest reference score can always be maintained. This real-time update of the reference score can help the user to diagnose the cognitive condition based on an accurate reference score at all times. In addition, since the test process is performed online, it is possible to assist the diagnosis based on the latest reference score without the constraints of the test location and time.

[0117] 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.

[0118] 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.

[0119] 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.

[0120] 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.

[0121] 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.

[0122] 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).

[0123] 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.

[0124] 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.

[0125] 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.

[0126] 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 tenth test for the second test process to the tenth test process.

[0127] 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.

[0128] The first processing unit 152 can execute a first inspection process. In this embodiment, the first processing unit 152 can execute the first inspection process multiple times, except for the practice inspection.

[0129] When performing the first inspection process, the first processing unit 152 can provide the user terminal 200 with a first instruction sentence that causes the user terminal 200 to speak one or more words that fall into a predefined presentation category within a first time limit.

[0130] The first processing unit 152 can receive, from the user terminal 200, a speech result for one or more words corresponding to a predefined presentation category in response to the first instruction sentence, and convert the result into a speech text.

[0131] The first processing unit 152 may compare the spoken text with the correct answer text to calculate a first inspection score. In the present embodiment, the first inspection score may be calculated to be higher as the number of spoken texts that are found to be correct increases with respect to the total number of times the first inspection process is performed.

[0132] In this embodiment, before executing the first inspection process, the first processing unit 152 can provide the user terminal 200 with one or more text and explanation display screens on how to execute the first inspection process, thereby allowing the user terminal 200 to execute a practice inspection for the first inspection process.

[0133] In this embodiment, if the first test score is higher than the cutoff score of the first criterion, the fluency can be evaluated as good, and if the first test score is lower than the cutoff score of the first criterion, the fluency can be evaluated as decreased.

[0134] 5A to 5H 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 first inspection process.

[0135] 5A shows the start screen of the first inspection process. Once the input of the start button 501 is received, it is possible to switch to the next screen.

[0136] 5B shows a screen that provides a text of how to execute the first inspection process and notifies the start of a practice inspection process (first practice inspection process) for the first inspection process. When the practice start button 502 is pressed, the screen can be switched to the next screen.

[0137] 5C shows a screen for executing the first practice test process. After checking the first 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.

[0138] 5D shows a screen notifying the re-execution of the first 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., three), or if the speaking voice volume is low, the first practice test process can be re-executed.

[0139] FIG. 5E shows a screen notifying the user that the first practice test process has been completed and that the actual test will now be performed.

[0140] 5F shows a screen informing the user of the first instruction sentence and the start of the first inspection process. When the start button 505 is pressed, the user can switch to the next screen.

[0141] 5G shows a screen for executing the first inspection process. After confirming the first instruction sentence, the user can press the microphone button 506 and speak a word corresponding to the first instruction sentence while watching the progress bar 507.

[0142] 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.

[0143] When executing the 2-1 inspection process, the first processing unit 152 can provide the user terminal 200 with a 2-1 instruction sentence that displays a plurality of presented words or a plurality of presented pictures and causes the user terminal 200 to select a word or picture that corresponds to a clue of a predetermined category from among the plurality of presented words or the plurality of presented pictures.

[0144] The first processing unit 152 may receive from the user terminal 200 a word or picture selection result in which one of a plurality of presented words or presented pictures is selected in response to the 2-1 instruction sentence.

[0145] The first processing unit 152 may compare the word or picture selection result with the correct word or image to calculate the 2-1 test score. In this embodiment, the 2-1 test 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 process is performed increases.

[0146] In this embodiment, before executing the 2-1 inspection process, the first processing unit 152 can provide the user terminal 200 with one or more of a text and an explanation display screen for explaining how to execute the 2-1 inspection process.

[0147] 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.

[0148] When executing the 2-2 inspection process, the first processing unit 152 can provide the user terminal 200 with a 2-2 instruction sentence, together with a predefined presented word or a predefined presented picture, which allows the user to select whether or not the predefined presented word or the predefined presented picture is a word seen in the previous inspection.

[0149] The first processing unit 152 may calculate a 2-2 test score by comparing a result of selecting whether a predefined presented word or a predefined presented picture is a word or picture seen in a previous test in response to the 2-2 instruction sentence with a correct word or picture. In this embodiment, the 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 process is performed increases.

[0150] In this embodiment, before executing the 2-2 inspection process, the first processing unit 152 can provide the user terminal 200 with one or more of a text and an explanation display screen for explaining how to execute the 2-2 inspection process.

[0151] 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 test score and the 2-2 test score. The first processing unit 152 may not add up the 2-1 test score and the 2-2 test score, but may use each of the 2-1 test score and the 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 has declined.

[0152] 6A to 6H are exemplary views of screens provided to the user terminal 200 for executing the second inspection process. FIGS. 6A to 6D are exemplary views of screens explaining the 2-1 inspection process, and FIGS. 6E to 6H are exemplary views of screens explaining the 2-2 inspection process. For convenience of explanation, the second inspection process according to the present embodiment is explained using words as an example out of words and pictures, and pictures may be included instead of words.

[0153] 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.

[0154] 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 screen can be switched to the next screen.

[0155] 6C shows a screen for executing a part of the 2-1 inspection process. After checking the 2-1 instruction sentence, the user can select one of the multiple presented words while watching the progress bar 603.

[0156] FIG. 6D shows a screen notifying the completion of the 2-1st inspection process and the start of the next inspection process.

[0157] 6E 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.

[0158] 6F shows a screen that provides a text of how to execute the 2-2 inspection process and notifies the start of the 2-2 inspection process. When the start button 604 is pressed, the screen can be switched to the next screen.

[0159] 6G shows a screen for executing the 2-2 inspection process. After confirming the 2-2 instruction sentence, the user can select one of the "Yes" button 605 and the "No" button 606 while watching the progress bar 612.

[0160] FIG. 6H shows a screen notifying the completion of the 2-2 inspection process and the start of the next inspection process.

[0161] 3, the first processing unit 152 can execute the third inspection process including the third inspection process. In this embodiment, the first processing unit 152 can execute the third inspection process multiple times except for the practice inspection.

[0162] When executing the third inspection process, the first processing unit 152 can display an arbitrary symbol image in the center of the screen and provide the user terminal 200 with a third instruction sentence that causes the user terminal 200 to select an arbitrary number that is matched to the same image as the arbitrary symbol image within a third time limit.

[0163] The first processing unit 152 can receive from the user terminal 200 a selection result for any number that is matched with the same image as the any symbol image in response to the third instruction sentence, and can compare the selected result with the correct answer to calculate a third test score. In this embodiment, the third test score can be calculated to be higher as the number of selection results that are found to be correct increases.

[0164] In this embodiment, before executing the third inspection process, the first processing unit 152 can provide the user terminal 200 with one or more text and explanation display screens on how to execute the third inspection process, thereby allowing the user terminal 200 to execute a practice inspection for the third inspection process.

[0165] In this embodiment, if the third test score is higher than the cutoff score for the third criterion, the executive function can be evaluated as being better, and if the third test score is lower than the cutoff score for the third criterion, the executive function can be evaluated as being deteriorated.

[0166] 7A to 7K are exemplary views of screens provided to the user terminal 200 for executing the third inspection process.

[0167] 7A shows the start screen of the fifth inspection process. When the input of the start button 701 is received, the next screen is switched to and an explanation display screen can be displayed.

[0168] 7B to 7D show explanatory display screens for the third inspection process. In FIG. 7B to 7D, the images can be displayed all at once or sequentially, and the screen can proceed to the next screen after a predetermined time has passed. In FIG. 7B, one of the symbol images is displayed in the center of the screen, and the hand image 702 shows how the number 1 is selected while moving according to the explanatory instruction. In FIG. 7C, a different symbol image is displayed in the center of the screen. In FIG. 7D, the hand image 703 shows how the number 5 is selected while moving according to the explanatory instruction.

[0169] 7E shows a screen notifying the start of a practice test process (third practice test process) for the third test process. When the practice start button 704 is input, the screen can be switched to the next screen.

[0170] FIG. 7F shows a screen for executing the third practice inspection process. The screen of FIG. 7F may include a third practice instruction, a symbol image displayed in the center of the screen, a plurality of symbol images displayed at the bottom of the screen, and a plurality of numbers matched with each of the plurality of symbol images. After checking the third practice instruction, the user may search for the symbol image most similar to the symbol image displayed in the center of the screen and select the number matched with the found symbol image.

[0171] In Fig. 7F, the symbol image displayed in the center of the screen and the symbol images displayed at the bottom of the screen may not be touch sensitive, whereas the numbers matched with each of the symbol images may be touch sensitive.

[0172] 7G shows a screen provided when the practice answer is incorrect, and FIG. 7H shows a screen provided when the practice answer is incorrect consecutively. In FIG. 7G and FIG. 7H, an instruction to reselect the number corresponding to the symbol image may be output.

[0173] 7I shows the countdown to finish the third practice test process and perform the third test process. In FIG. 7I, a 3, 2, 1, start screen may be displayed before the start of the third test process.

[0174] FIG. 7J shows an execution screen of the third inspection process. The screen of FIG. 7J may include a third instruction, a symbol image displayed in the center of the screen, a plurality of symbol images displayed at the bottom of the screen, and a plurality of numbers matched with each of the plurality of symbol images. After confirming the third instruction, the user may search for the symbol image most similar to the symbol image displayed in the center of the screen and select the number matched with the found symbol image. In FIG. 7J, the time elapsed until the user selects the number may be counted by a progress bar 705.

[0175] FIG. 7K shows a screen indicating that the third inspection process has been completed and the next inspection process is about to begin.

[0176] 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.

[0177] 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 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.

[0178] 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 presented image is equal to or greater than a predetermined number in response to the 4-1 instruction sentence, and can compare the selection result with the correct answer to calculate a 4-1 inspection score. In this embodiment, the 4-1 inspection score can be calculated to be higher as the number of selection results that are found to be correct relative to the total number of times the 4-1 inspection process is performed increases.

[0179] In this embodiment, before executing the 4-1 inspection process, the first processing unit 152 can provide the user terminal 200 with one or more of a text and an explanation display screen for explaining how to execute the 4-1 inspection process.

[0180] The first processing unit 152 can execute the 4-2 inspection process after the execution of the 4-1 inspection process is completed and a predetermined time has elapsed.

[0181] When executing the 4-2 inspection process, the first processing unit 152 can display a default second presentation image and provide the user terminal 200 with a 4-2 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.

[0182] 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 4-2 instruction sentence, and compare the selection result with the correct answer.

[0183] The first processing unit 152 can count a first time duration from the time when the 4-2 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.

[0184] The first processing unit 152 can calculate the 4-2 inspection score by reflecting the result of the comparison and the result of counting the first required time. In this embodiment, the 4-2 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 4-2 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 4-2 inspection process is performed, if the result of counting the first required time is large, the 4-2 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 4-2 inspection process is performed, if the result of counting the first required time is small, the 4-2 inspection score can be high.

[0185] In this embodiment, before executing the 4-2 inspection process, the first processing unit 152 can provide the user terminal 200 with one or more of a text and an explanation display screen for explaining how to execute the 4-2 inspection process.

[0186] As an alternative embodiment, the first processing unit 152 may calculate the fourth test score by adding up the 4-1 test score and the 4-2 test score. The first processing unit 152 may 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 4th test score is higher than the cutoff score of the 4th criterion, it may be evaluated that the visual-perceptual memory is good, and if the 4th test score is lower than the cutoff score of the 4th criterion, it may be evaluated that the visual-perceptual memory has declined.

[0187] 8A to 8H are exemplary views of screens provided to the user terminal 200 for executing the fourth inspection process. Fig. 8A to Fig. 8D are exemplary views of screens explaining the 4-1 inspection process, and Fig. 8E to Fig. 8H are exemplary views of screens explaining the 4-2 inspection process.

[0188] 8A shows the start screen of the 4-1 inspection process. When the input of the start button 801 is received, the next screen can be switched to.

[0189] 8B shows a screen that provides a text of how to execute the 4-1 inspection process and notifies the start of the 4-1 inspection process. When the start button 802 is pressed, the screen can be switched to the next screen.

[0190] 8C shows a screen for executing the 4-1 inspection process. After checking the 4-1 instruction, the user can select one of a "Yes" button 803 or a "No" button 804 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 that performs one or more of the functions of counting a time limit and indicating the progress of the work.

[0191] FIG. 8D shows a screen notifying the completion of the 4-1st inspection process and the start of the next inspection process.

[0192] 8E shows the start screen of the 4-2 inspection process. When the input of the start button 805 is received, the next screen can be switched to. Here, the start screen of the 4-2 inspection processor can be provided to the user terminal 200 after the execution of the 2-2 inspection process is completed.

[0193] FIG. 8F shows a screen informing an invitation to reproduce the first presented image provided during execution of the 4-1 inspection process.

[0194] 8G shows a screen for executing the 4-2 inspection process. After checking the 4-2 instruction, the user can select one of a "Yes" button 806 or a "No" button 807 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.

[0195] FIG. 8H shows a screen notifying the completion of the 4-2 inspection process and the start of the next inspection process.

[0196] 3, the first processing unit 152 can execute a fifth inspection process including a 5-1 inspection process and a 5-2 inspection process. In this embodiment, the first processing unit 152 can execute the fifth inspection process multiple times, except for the practice inspection.

[0197] When executing the 5-1 inspection process, the first processing unit 152 can provide the user terminal 200 with a 5-1 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.

[0198] 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 5-1 instruction sentence, and can compare the selected result with the correct answer to calculate the 5-1 test score. In this embodiment, the 5-1 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 5-1 test process is performed increases.

[0199] In this embodiment, before executing the 5-1 inspection process, the first processing unit 152 can provide the user terminal 200 with one or more text and explanation display screens on how to execute the 5-1 inspection process, allowing the user terminal 200 to execute a practice inspection for the 5-1 inspection process.

[0200] The first processing unit 152 can execute the 5-2 inspection process after completing the execution of the 5-1 inspection process.

[0201] When performing the 5-2 inspection process, the first processing unit 152 can provide the user terminal 200 with a 5-2 instruction sentence that displays a pre-defined presented word and two color-selected words and causes the user to select a word having the same color as the pre-defined presented word from among the two color-selected words.

[0202] 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 5-2 instruction sentence, and can compare the selected result with the correct answer to calculate the 5-2 test score. In this embodiment, the 5-2 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 5-2 test process is performed increases.

[0203] In this embodiment, before executing the 5-2 inspection process, the first processing unit 152 can provide the user terminal 200 with one or more text and explanation display screens on how to execute the 5-2 inspection process, allowing the user terminal 200 to execute a practice inspection for the 5-2 inspection process.

[0204] As an alternative embodiment, the first processing unit 152 may calculate the fifth test score by adding up the 5-1 test score and the 5-2 test score. The first processing unit 152 may not add up the 5-1 test score and the 5-2 test score, but may use each of the 5-1 test score and the 5-2 test score when evaluating cognitive function decline. In this embodiment, if the 5th test score is higher than the cutoff score of the 5th criterion, the inhibitory function may be evaluated as being good, and if the 5th test score is lower than the cutoff score of the 5th criterion, the inhibitory function may be evaluated as being declined. Figures 9A to 9O are exemplary diagrams of screens provided to the user terminal 200 to execute the fifth test process. Figures 9A to 9I are exemplary diagrams of screens explaining the 5-1 test process, and Figures 9J to 9O are exemplary diagrams of screens explaining the 5-2 test process.

[0205] 9A shows the start screen of the 5-1 inspection process. When the input of the start button 901 is received, the screen can be switched to the 5-1 inspection process screen.

[0206] 9B shows a screen that provides a text of how to execute the 5-1 inspection process and notifies the start of a practice inspection process (5-1 practice inspection process) for the 5-1 inspection process. When the practice start button 902 is pressed, the screen can be switched to the next screen.

[0207] 9C shows a screen for executing the 5-1 practice test process. After checking the 5-1 practice instruction sentence, the user can select the same word as the presented word from the first selected word 903 and the second selected word 904. Here, a progress bar (not shown) that performs one or more of a function of counting a time limit and a function of indicating the progress of the task can be further included.

[0208] Figure 9D shows a screen displaying that the first selected word 905 selected from Figure 9C is the correct answer, where the first selected word 905 is the same as the first selected word 903 in Figure 9C.

[0209] 9E shows a screen notifying the user to re-execute the 5-1 practice test process. If the execution result of the 5-1 practice test process is an incorrect answer, the 5-1 practice test process can be re-executed.

[0210] FIG. 9F shows a screen notifying the user that the 5-1 practice test process has been completed and that the actual test will now be performed.

[0211] 9G shows a screen for executing the 5-1 inspection process. After checking the 5-1 instruction sentence, the user can select the same word as the presented word from among the first selected word 907 and the second selected word 908 while watching the progress bar 906.

[0212] Fig. 9H shows a screen displaying that the first selected word 909 selected from Fig. 9G is the correct answer. Here, the first selected word 909 is the same as the first selected word 907 in Fig. 9G.

[0213] FIG. 9I shows a screen notifying the completion of the 5-1st inspection process and the start of the next inspection process.

[0214] FIG. 9J shows the start screen of the 5-2 inspection process.

[0215] 9K shows a screen that provides a text of how to execute the 5-2 inspection process and notifies the start of a practice inspection process for the 5-2 inspection process (5-2 practice inspection process). When the practice start button 910 is pressed, the next screen can be displayed.

[0216] FIG. 9L shows a screen for executing the 5-2 practice test process. After checking the 5-2 practice instruction sentence, the user can select a word having the same color as the presented word from among the first selected word 911 and the second selected word 912. 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 can be further included. FIG. 9L shows an example in which the user selects the second selected word 912.

[0217] FIG. 9M shows a screen notifying the user that the 5-2 practice test process has been completed and that the actual test will now be performed.

[0218] Fig. 9N shows a screen for executing the 5-2 inspection process. After checking the 5-2 instruction sentence, the user can select a word having the same color as the presented word from among the first selected word 914 and the second selected word 915 while looking at the progress bar 913. Fig. 9N shows an example in which the user selects the second selected word 915.

[0219] FIG. 9O shows a screen notifying the completion of the 5-2 inspection process and the start of the next inspection process.

[0220] 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.

[0221] When performing the sixth inspection process, the first processing unit 152 may provide a predefined face presentation image expressing an emotion and a plurality of buttons for selecting an emotion state. The first processing unit 152 may provide the user terminal 200 with a sixth instruction sentence for selecting an emotion state shown in the predefined face presentation image by pressing one of the plurality of buttons. Here, the plurality of emotion buttons may include a joy button, a surprise button, a sadness button, a fear button, an anger button, and a neutral button.

[0222] The first processing unit 152 can receive from the user terminal 200 a result of selecting an emotional state shown in a predetermined face presentation image by using one of a plurality of buttons in response to the sixth instruction sentence, and can compare the selected result with a 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 executed increases.

[0223] 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.

[0224] In this embodiment, if the sixth test score is higher than the cutoff score of the sixth criterion, it can be evaluated that the ability to recognize emotional states is good, and if the sixth test score is lower than the cutoff score of the sixth criterion, it can be evaluated that the ability to recognize emotional strength has decreased.

[0225] 10A to 10G are exemplary views of screens provided to the user terminal 200 for executing the sixth inspection process.

[0226] 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.

[0227] 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 screen can be switched to the next screen.

[0228] 10C shows a screen for executing the sixth practice test process. After checking the sixth practice instruction, the user can select one of a number of assessment buttons 1003 to 1008 to determine the emotional state of the face presentation image. Here, a program bar (not shown) for performing one or more of a function of counting a time limit and a function of showing the progress of the work is further included.

[0229] 10D shows an execution result screen of the sixth inspection process, in which the sadness button 1005 is selected from among the multiple buttons 1003 to 1008.

[0230] FIG. 10E shows a screen notifying the completion of the sixth practice test process and the execution of the actual test.

[0231] 10F shows an embodiment of a screen for executing the sixth inspection process. After checking the sixth instruction sentence, the user can select the emotional state shown in the face presentation image by pressing any one of the buttons 1003-1008 while watching the progress bar 1009. When the user completes the selection of any one of the buttons 1003-1008 or the time limit count is completed, the screen can be switched to the next screen. Here, the time count result value until one of the buttons 1003-1008 is selected can be output to the first processing unit 152.

[0232] FIG. 10G shows a screen indicating that the sixth inspection process has been completed and the next inspection process is about to begin.

[0233] Returning to Fig. 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 7-1 inspection process and the 7-2 inspection process multiple times, except for the practice inspection.

[0234] When executing the 7-1 inspection process, the first processing unit 152 can select any number that is marked as start within the 7-1 time limit (e.g., 300 seconds) and provide the user terminal 200 with a 7-1 instruction sentence that causes the user terminal 200 to select other presented numbers in descending or ascending order.

[0235] The first processing unit 152 can select an arbitrary number marked as "start" in response to the 7-1 instruction from the user terminal 200, and can receive the result of selecting other presented numbers in descending or ascending order.

[0236] The first processing unit 152 can count the time that has elapsed until the result of selecting the numbers in descending or ascending order is correct, and calculate the 7-1 test score. That is, the time taken to perform the task without errors within the 7-1 time limit can be calculated as the 7-1 score. The shorter the time taken to perform the task without errors, the better the executive function can be evaluated to be. Also, if five mistakes are made within the 7-1 time limit, the 7-1 test can be deemed to have been failed.

[0237] In this embodiment, before executing the 7-1 inspection process, the first processing unit 152 can provide the user terminal 200 with one or more text and explanation display screens on how to execute the 7-1 inspection process, allowing the user terminal 200 to execute a practice inspection for the 7-1 inspection process.

[0238] The first processing unit 152 can execute the 7-1 inspection process after the execution of the 7-1 inspection process is completed and a predetermined time has elapsed.

[0239] When executing the 7-2 inspection process, the first processing unit 152 can provide the user terminal 200 with a 7-2 instruction sentence that causes the user terminal 200 to alternately select an arbitrary number and a day of the week corresponding to the arbitrary number from the numbers and days of the week presented within the 7-2 time limit.

[0240] The first processing unit 152 can receive from the user terminal 200 a result of alternately selecting an arbitrary number and a day of the week corresponding to the arbitrary number in response to the 7-2 instruction sentence.

[0241] The first processing unit 152 can count the time that has elapsed until the result of selecting the numbers in descending or ascending order is correct, and calculate the 7-2 test score. That is, the time taken to complete the task without errors within the 7-2 time limit can be calculated as the 7-2 score. The shorter the time taken to complete the task without errors, the better the executive function can be evaluated to be. Also, if five mistakes are made within the 7-2 time limit, the 7-2 test can be deemed to have been failed.

[0242] In this embodiment, before executing the 7-2 inspection process, the first processing unit 152 can provide the user terminal 200 with one or more text and explanation display screens on how to execute the 7-2 inspection process, allowing the user terminal 200 to execute a practice inspection for the 7-2 inspection process.

[0243] As an alternative embodiment, the first processing unit 152 may add up the 7-1 test score and the 7-2 test score to calculate the 7th test score. Alternatively, the first processing unit 152 may use each of the 7-1 test score and the 7-2 test score when evaluating the executive function, without adding up the 7-1 test score and the 7-2 test score. In this embodiment, if the sum of the 7-1 test score and the 7-2 test score is higher than the cutoff score of the 7th criterion, the executive function may be evaluated as being better, and if the 7th test score is lower than the cutoff score of the 7th criterion, the executive function may be evaluated as being deteriorated.

[0244] 11A to 11U are exemplary views of screens provided to the user terminal 200 for executing the 7-1 inspection process.

[0245] 11A shows the start screen of the 7-1 inspection process. When the input of the start button 1101 is received, the next screen is switched to and an explanation display screen can be displayed.

[0246] 11B to 11F show explanatory display screens for the 7-1st inspection process. In FIG. 11B to FIG. 11D, the numbers can be displayed all at once or sequentially, and the screen can proceed to the next screen after a predetermined time has passed. In FIG. 11B, any number can be displayed on the screen. In FIG. 11B, the phrase "start" can be displayed on any one of the numbers on the screen. Also, the phrase "end" can be displayed on the last number of the numbers. In FIG. 11C to FIG. 11F, the number 1 with "start" written on it can be selected, and an instruction to select the next number in ascending order can be output. Also, in FIG. 11C to FIG. 11F, when the hand image 1102 touches the numbers 1, 2, and 3 in order, the numbers that have been touched may change color. And the numbers that have been touched can be displayed so that they are connected to each other by a line segment.

[0247] 11G shows a screen notifying the start of a practice test process for the 7-1 test process (7-1 practice test process). When the practice start button 1103 is input, the screen can be switched to the next screen.

[0248] FIG. 11H shows a screen for executing the 7-1 practice test process. For example, the screen of FIG. 11H can display the 7-1 practice instruction sentence for selecting numbers in ascending order and arbitrary numbers. The phrase "start" can be displayed on the number to be selected first among the arbitrary numbers. Also, the phrase "end" can be displayed on the number to be selected last among the arbitrary numbers.

[0249] Fig. 11I shows a screen to be displayed when the first incorrect practice answer is made, and Fig. 11J shows a screen to be displayed when the user makes two or more consecutive incorrect practice answers. In Figs. 11I and 11J, an instruction to reselect a number can be output.

[0250] Fig. 11K shows a screen that is presented when a preset time (e.g., 10 seconds) has elapsed without any number being selected, and a prompt to select a number and start the test can be output in Fig. 11K.

[0251] Fig. 11L shows a screen that is presented when a predetermined time (e.g., 20 seconds) has elapsed without selecting the next number after selecting one or more numbers. In Fig. 11L, a prompt to select the next number in the sequence can be output.

[0252] FIG. 11M shows a screen on which an instruction message is displayed prompting the user to select a start test button 1104 to end the 7-1 practice test process and execute the 7-1 test process.

[0253] 11N shows a countdown to execute the 7-1 inspection process. In FIG. 11N, a 3, 2, 1, start screen may be displayed before the 7-1 inspection process begins.

[0254] 11O and 11P show the execution screen of the 7-1 inspection process. For example, the 7-1 instruction sentence for selecting numbers in ascending order and an arbitrary number can be displayed on the screen of FIG. 11O and FIG. 11P. The number to be selected first among the arbitrary numbers can be displayed with the phrase "start". Also, the number to be selected last among the arbitrary numbers can be displayed with the phrase "end". On the screen of FIG. 11P, the numbers that have been touched can be displayed in a different color. On the screen of FIG. 11P, the numbers that have been touched can be displayed as if they are connected to each other by a line segment. From FIG. 11O and FIG. 11P, the user can select a number while watching the progress bar 1105 that counts the elapsed time.

[0255] FIG. 11Q shows a screen provided upon the first incorrect answer, and FIG. 11R shows a screen provided upon two or more incorrect answers. In FIG. 11Q and FIG. 11R, numbers selected in an incorrect order can be changed to another color (e.g., red). Also, in FIG. 11Q and FIG. 11R, a prompt to reselect a number can be output. Even in a situation where a prompt is output, the elapsed time can continue to be counted.

[0256] Figure 11S shows a screen that is presented when a preset time (e.g., 10 seconds) has elapsed without any number being selected. In Figure 11S, an instruction to select a number and start the test can be output.

[0257] Fig. 11T shows a screen that is presented when a preset time (e.g., 20 seconds) has elapsed without selecting the next number after selecting one or more numbers. In Fig. 11T, a prompt to select the next number in the sequence can be output.

[0258] FIG. 11U shows a screen notifying the completion of the 7-1 inspection process and the start of the next inspection process.

[0259] 12A to 12N are exemplary views of screens provided to the user terminal 200 for executing the 7-2 inspection process.

[0260] 12A shows the start screen of the 7-2 inspection process. When the input of the start button 2101 is received, the next screen is switched to and an explanation display screen can be displayed.

[0261] FIG. 12B and FIG. 12C show explanatory display screens for the 7-2 inspection process. FIG. 12B and FIG. 12C can be displayed all at once or sequentially, and the screen can proceed to the next screen after a predetermined time has passed. In FIG. 12B, an arbitrary number and an arbitrary day of the week can be displayed on the screen. In FIG. 12B, an instruction sentence for selecting numbers and days of the week alternately can be displayed. A phrase "start" can be displayed on any one of the arbitrary numbers. Also, a phrase "end" can be displayed on the last number of the arbitrary numbers. In FIG. 12C, an instruction sentence for selecting the number 1 with "start" written on it and selecting the month that is the start of the day of the week can be output. In FIG. 12C, when the hand image 1202 touches the numbers 1, month, 2, Tuesday, and 3 in order, the numbers and days of the week that have been touched can change color. And the numbers and days of the week that have been touched can be displayed so that they are connected to each other by a line segment.

[0262] 12D shows a screen notifying the start of a practice test process for the 7-2 test process (7-2 practice test process). When the practice start button 1203 is input, the screen can be switched to the next screen.

[0263] FIG. 12E shows a screen for executing the 7-2 practice test process. For example, the screen of FIG. 12E may display a 7-2 practice instruction sentence for alternately selecting a number and a day of the week, and an arbitrary number and an arbitrary day of the week. The number to be selected first among the arbitrary numbers may be displayed with the phrase "start." Also, the number or day of the week to be selected last among the arbitrary numbers may be displayed with the phrase "end." The user may perform the practice test by alternately selecting a number and a day of the week while looking at the arbitrary number and the arbitrary day of the week shown in FIG. 12E.

[0264] FIG. 12F shows a screen on which an instruction message is displayed prompting the user to select a start test button 1204 to end the 7-2 practice test process and execute the 7-2 test process.

[0265] 12G shows a countdown to execute the 7-2 inspection process. In FIG. 12G, a 3, 2, 1, start screen may be displayed before the 7-2 inspection process begins.

[0266] FIG. 12H and FIG. 12I show the execution screen of the 7-2 inspection process. For example, the 7-2 instruction sentence for alternately selecting a number and a day of the week, and an arbitrary number and an arbitrary day of the week can be displayed on the screen of FIG. 12H and FIG. 12I. The number to be selected first among the arbitrary numbers can be displayed with the phrase "start". Also, the number or day of the week to be selected last among the arbitrary numbers and the arbitrary day of the week can be displayed with the phrase "end". On the screen of FIG. 12I, the number or day of the week that has been touched can be displayed in a different color. On the screen of FIG. 12I, the numbers and days of the week that have been touched can be displayed so that they are connected to each other by a line segment. From FIG. 12H and FIG. 12I, the user can alternately select a number and a day of the week while watching the progress bar 1205 that counts the elapsed time.

[0267] Fig. 12J shows a screen provided when the first incorrect answer is given, and Fig. 12K shows a screen provided when the first incorrect answer is given two or more times. In Fig. 12J and Fig. 12K, a prompting message can be output to prompt the user to reselect one or more of the number and the day of the week. Even in a situation where a prompting message is output, the elapsed time can continue to be counted.

[0268] Fig. 12L shows a screen that is presented when a preset time (e.g., 10 seconds) has elapsed without any number being selected. In Fig. 12L, an instruction to select a number and start the test can be output.

[0269] Fig. 12M shows a screen that is presented when a preset time (e.g., 20 seconds) has elapsed without selecting the next number or day after selecting one or more numbers or days of the week. In Fig. 12M, a prompt to select the next number or day of the week in the sequence can be output.

[0270] FIG. 12N shows a screen indicating that the seventh inspection process has been completed and the next inspection process is about to begin.

[0271] 3, the first processing unit 152 can execute an eighth inspection process including an 8-1 inspection process and an 8-2 inspection process. In this embodiment, the first processing unit 152 can execute the eighth inspection process multiple times.

[0272] When performing the 8-1 inspection process, the first processing unit 152 can provide the user terminal 200 with an 8-1 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 determines the size of each of the first objects to select the plurality of first object presentation images in descending or ascending order.

[0273] The first processing unit 152 can receive the result of selecting the first object presenting image in descending or ascending order in response to the 8-1 instruction sentence from the user terminal 200, and can calculate the 8-1 test score by comparing the selected result with the correct answer. In this embodiment, the 8-1 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 8-1 process is executed increases.

[0274] In this embodiment, before executing the 8-1 inspection process, the first processing unit 152 can provide the user terminal 200 with one or more of a text and an explanation display screen to show how to execute the 8-1 inspection process.

[0275] The first processing unit 152 can execute the 8-2 inspection process after completing the execution of the 8-1 inspection process.

[0276] When performing the 8-2 inspection process, the first processing unit 152 can provide the user terminal 200 with an 8-2 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 or ascending order.

[0277] The first processing unit 152 can receive from the user terminal 200 the result of selecting the second object presentation image in descending or ascending order in response to the 8-2 instruction sentence, and compare the selected result with the correct answer to calculate the 8-1 test score.

[0278] In this embodiment, the first processing unit 152 may provide the user terminal 200 with at least one of a text and an explanation display screen on how to execute the 8-2 inspection process before executing the 8-2 inspection process. In this embodiment, the 8-2 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 8-2 process is executed increases.

[0279] As an alternative embodiment, the first processing unit 152 can calculate the 8th test score by adding up the 8-1 test score and the 8-2 test score. The first processing unit 152 can also use each of the 8-1 test score and the 8-2 test score when evaluating cognitive decline, without adding up the 8-1 test score and the 8-2 test score. In this embodiment, if the 8th test score is higher than the cutoff score of the 8th criterion, it can be evaluated that the semantic memory is good, and if the 8th test score is lower than the cutoff score of the 8th criterion, it can be evaluated that the semantic memory has declined.

[0280] 13A to 13J are exemplary views of screens provided to the user terminal 200 for executing the eighth inspection process. 13A to 13E are exemplary views of screens explaining the 8-1st inspection process, and 13F to 13J are exemplary views of screens explaining the 8-2nd inspection process.

[0281] 13A shows the start screen of the 8-1 inspection process. When the input of the start button 1301 is received, the screen can be switched to the 8-1 inspection process screen.

[0282] 13B shows a screen that provides a text of how to execute the 8-1 inspection process and notifies the start of the 8-1 inspection process. When the start button 1302 is pressed, the screen can be switched to the next screen.

[0283] 13C shows a screen for executing the 8-1 inspection process. After confirming the 8-1 instruction sentence, the user can select multiple first object presenting images in order of size while watching the progress bar 1303. If the user needs to correct the selection, he / she inputs the input correction button 1304 to make a reselection. When the user completes the selection and inputs the confirmation button 1305, the screen can be switched to the next screen.

[0284] 13D shows a screen showing the results of the execution of the inspection process 8-1. A number indicating the order selected by the user may be displayed on the first object presenting image.

[0285] FIG. 13E shows a screen notifying the completion of the 8-1st inspection process and the start of the next inspection process.

[0286] FIG. 13F shows the start screen of the 8-2 inspection process.

[0287] 13G shows a screen that provides a text of how to execute the 8-2 inspection process and notifies the start of the 8-2 inspection process. When the start button 1306 is pressed, the screen can be switched to the next screen.

[0288] Fig. 13H shows a screen for executing the 8-2 inspection process. After checking the 8-2 instruction sentence, the user can select multiple second object presenting images in order of weight while watching the progress bar 1307. If the user needs to correct the selection, he / she inputs the input correction button 1308 to make a reselection. When the user completes the selection and inputs the confirmation button 1309, the screen can be switched to the next screen.

[0289] FIG. 13I shows a screen notifying the completion of the 8-2 inspection process and the start of the next inspection process.

[0290] 3, the first processing unit 152 can execute the ninth inspection process, including the ninth inspection process. In this embodiment, the first processing unit 152 can execute the ninth inspection process multiple times, except for the practice inspection.

[0291] When performing the ninth inspection process, the first processing unit 152 can provide any one main image and a narration for the main image on the screen, and after the provision of the narration is completed, can provide the user terminal 200 with a ninth instruction sentence that allows the user to select an answer to a question while viewing multiple sub-images included in the main image.

[0292] The first processing unit 152 can receive from the user terminal 200 a selection result of an answer to the question in response to the ninth instruction sentence, and can calculate a ninth test score by comparing the selection result with a correct answer. In this embodiment, the ninth test score can be calculated to be higher as more of the selection results are found to be correct.

[0293] In this embodiment, before executing the ninth inspection process, the first processing unit 152 can provide the user terminal 200 with one or more text and explanation display screens on how to execute the ninth inspection process, allowing the user terminal 200 to execute a practice inspection for the ninth inspection process.

[0294] In this embodiment, if the 9th test score is higher than the cutoff score of the 9th criterion, it can be evaluated that the level of understanding of social situations is better, and if the 9th test score is lower than the cutoff score of the 9th criterion, it can be evaluated that the level of understanding of social situations has decreased.

[0295] 14A to 14G are exemplary views of screens provided to the user terminal 200 for executing the ninth inspection process.

[0296] 14A shows the start screen of the ninth inspection process. When the input of the start button 1401 is received, the next screen is switched to and an explanation display screen can be displayed.

[0297] Fig. 14B shows an explanation display screen, which may indicate that the test involves listening to a short story and answering questions.

[0298] 14C shows a screen notifying the start of the ninth inspection process. When the inspection start button 1402 is pressed, the screen can be switched to the ninth inspection screen.

[0299] 14D to 14F show the ninth examination screen. In FIG. 14D, any one main image and a narration for the main image can be provided on the screen. In FIG. 14E, a plurality of sub-images included in the main image and an instruction to ask a question can be displayed after the provision of the narration is completed. In FIG. 14F, a plurality of sub-images, a question, and answer buttons that can be selected for the question (for example, a "Yes" button 1403 and a "No" button 1404) can be displayed. While viewing the plurality of sub-images, the user can select one of the answer buttons as an answer to the question.

[0300] FIG. 14G shows a screen indicating that the ninth inspection process has been completed and the next inspection process is about to begin.

[0301] 3, the first processing unit 152 can execute a tenth inspection process. In this embodiment, the first processing unit 152 can execute the tenth inspection process multiple times, except for the practice inspection.

[0302] When performing the tenth inspection process, the first processing unit 152 can provide the user terminal 200 with a tenth instruction sentence that displays a plurality of predefined presentation figures and causes the user terminal 200 to select a figure of a different color from the plurality of predefined presentation figures.

[0303] The first processing unit 152 can receive from the user terminal 200 the result of selecting shapes of different colors from a plurality of predefined presentation shapes in response to the tenth instruction sentence, and can compare the selected result with the correct answer to calculate a tenth inspection score. In this embodiment, the tenth 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 tenth inspection process is performed increases.

[0304] In this embodiment, before executing the tenth inspection process, the first processing unit 152 can provide the user terminal 200 with one or more text and explanation display screens on how to execute the tenth inspection process, allowing the user terminal 200 to execute a practice inspection for the tenth inspection process.

[0305] In this embodiment, if the 10th inspection score is higher than the cutoff score of the 10th criterion, the color classification ability can be evaluated as good, and if the 10th inspection score is lower than the cutoff score of the 10th criterion, the color classification ability can be evaluated as degraded.

[0306] 15A to 15J are exemplary views of screens provided to the user terminal 200 for executing the tenth inspection process.

[0307] 15A shows the start screen of the inspection process 10. When the input of the start button 1501 is received, the next screen can be switched to.

[0308] 15B shows a screen that provides a text of how to execute the tenth inspection process and notifies the start of a practice inspection process (tenth practice inspection process) for the tenth inspection process. When the practice start button 1502 is pressed, the screen can be switched to the next screen.

[0309] 15C shows a screen for executing the tenth practice test process. After confirming the tenth practice instruction, the user can select a different colored shape from a plurality of pre-defined presented shapes while watching the progress bar 1503. When the selection of the shape is completed or the time limit is counted, the user can switch to the next screen.

[0310] Fig. 15D shows a screen showing the results of the execution of the tenth practice test process shown in Fig. 15C. 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.

[0311] 15E shows a screen notifying the re-execution of the 10th practice test process. If the execution result of the 10th practice test process is an incorrect answer, the 10th practice test process can be re-executed.

[0312] FIG. 15F shows a screen notifying the completion of the 10th practice test process and the execution of the actual test.

[0313] 15G shows a screen that provides text on how to execute the 10th inspection process and notifies the start of the 10th inspection process. When the start button 1504 is pressed, the screen can be switched to the next screen.

[0314] 15H shows a screen for executing the tenth inspection process. After confirming the tenth instruction, the user can select a different colored shape from a number of predefined presented shapes while watching the progress bar 1505. When the selection of the shape is completed or the time limit is counted, the user can switch to the next screen.

[0315] Fig. 15I shows a screen showing the results of the execution of the tenth inspection process shown in Fig. 15H. If the selected figure is correct, a correct symbol and / or a correct sound effect can be used to output that the answer is correct. If the selected figure is incorrect, an incorrect symbol and / or an incorrect sound effect can be used to output that the answer is incorrect.

[0316] FIG. 15J illustrates a screen indicating that the execution of the tenth inspection process has been completed and that the inspection results are waiting to be output.

[0317] Returning to FIG. 3, when the first processing unit 152 completes execution of the first to tenth 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.

[0318] The second processing unit 153 can classify the second test item and the fourth test item into the first neurocognitive category. The second processing unit 153 can classify the sixth test item and the ninth test item into the second neurocognitive category. The second processing unit 153 can classify the eighth test item into the third neurocognitive category. The second processing unit 153 can classify the tenth test item into the fourth neurocognitive category. The second processing unit 153 can classify the first test item, the third test item, the fifth test item, and the seventh test item into the fifth neurocognitive category.

[0319] 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.

[0320] 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.

[0321] In this embodiment, the evaluation process may include a first evaluation process to a fifth evaluation process.

[0322] 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 fourth test score.

[0323] 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).

[0324] 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.

[0325] When performing the first evaluation process, the third processing unit 154 may compare the fourth test score for the fourth test item with a fourth reference score, and generate a second comparison result when the fourth test score is less than the fourth reference score. In this embodiment, the fourth test score may include a visual schematic memory 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).

[0326] 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 fourth test score is less than the fourth 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 fourth test score is equal to or greater than the fourth 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.

[0327] 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.

[0328] The third processing unit 154 can execute a second evaluation process to evaluate whether there is cognitive decline in a second neurocognitive category based on the sixth test score and the eighth test score.

[0329] When performing the second evaluation process, the third processing unit 154 may compare the sixth test score for the sixth test item with a sixth reference score, and generate a third comparison result when the sixth test score is less than the sixth reference score. In this embodiment, the sixth test score may include a facial emotion test score. In this embodiment, the sixth reference score may include a sixth test score of a normal group whose sixth Z-score is the sixth standard deviation (e.g., -1.5SD).

[0330] 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. In this embodiment, the third comparison result may be replaced with the 3-1 comparison result.

[0331] When performing the second evaluation process, the third processing unit 154 may compare the ninth test score for the ninth test item with the ninth reference score, and generate a fourth comparison result when the ninth test score is less than the fourth reference score. In this embodiment, the ninth test score may include a theory of mind 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).

[0332] 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 9th test score is less than the 9th reference score. From the 4-1 comparison result, it can be seen that the user's understanding of the social situation has decreased. The 4-2 comparison result may be generated when the 9th test score is equal to or greater than the 9th reference score. From the 4-2 comparison result, it can be seen that the user's understanding of the social situation is good. In this embodiment, the fourth comparison result may be replaced with the 4-1 comparison result. The third processing unit 154 may evaluate that there is a cognitive decline in the second neurocognitive category, i.e., social cognition, by generating one or more of the third comparison result and the fourth comparison result.

[0333] The third processing unit 154 can execute a third evaluation process to evaluate whether or not there is cognitive decline in a third neurocognitive category based on the eighth test score.

[0334] When performing the third evaluation process, the third processing unit 154 may compare the eighth inspection score for the eighth inspection item with the eighth reference score, and generate a fifth comparison result when the eighth inspection score is less than the eighth reference score. In this embodiment, the eighth inspection score may include a size and weight inspection score. In this embodiment, the eighth reference score may include an eighth inspection score of a normal group in which an eighth Z-score is an eighth standard deviation (e.g., -1.5 SD).

[0335] 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 eighth test score is less than the eighth reference score. The fifth comparison result may indicate that the user's semantic memory has deteriorated. The fifth comparison result may be generated when the eighth test score is equal to or greater than the eighth reference score. The fifth comparison result may indicate that the user's semantic memory is good. In this embodiment, the fifth comparison result may be replaced with the fifth comparison result.

[0336] The third processing unit 154 can execute a fourth evaluation process to evaluate whether there is cognitive decline in a fourth neurocognitive category based on the tenth test score.

[0337] When performing the fourth evaluation process, the third processing unit 154 may compare the tenth test score for the tenth test item with the tenth reference score, and generate a sixth comparison result when the tenth test score is less than the tenth reference score. In this embodiment, the tenth test score may include a color perception test score. In this embodiment, the tenth reference score may include a tenth test score of a normal group in which the tenth Z-score is ten standard deviations (e.g., -1.5 SD).

[0338] 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 tenth test score is less than the tenth reference score. The sixth comparison result may indicate that the user's color classification ability has deteriorated. The sixth comparison result may be generated when the tenth test score is equal to or greater than the tenth reference score. The sixth comparison result may indicate that the user's color classification ability is good. In this embodiment, the sixth comparison result may be replaced with the sixth comparison result.

[0339] 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 third test score, the fifth test score and the seventh test score.

[0340] 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 a seventh 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).

[0341] 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 first test score is less than the first reference score. The 7-1 comparison result indicates that the user's fluency has decreased. The 7-2 comparison result may be generated when the first test score is equal to or greater than the first reference score. The 7-2 comparison result indicates that the user's fluency is good. In this embodiment, the seventh comparison result may be replaced with the 7-1 comparison result.

[0342] When performing the fifth evaluation process, the third processing unit 154 may compare the third test score for the third test item with the third reference score, and generate an eighth comparison result when the third test score is less than the third reference score. In this embodiment, the third test score may include a symbol-digit matching test score. In this embodiment, the third reference score may include a third test score of a normal group whose third Z-score is the third standard deviation (e.g., -1.5 SD).

[0343] 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 third test score is less than the third reference score. The 8-1 comparison result indicates that the user's inhibitory function has deteriorated. The 8-2 comparison result may be generated when the third test score is equal to or greater than the third reference score. The 8-2 comparison result indicates that the user's inhibitory function is good. In this embodiment, the eighth comparison result may be replaced with the 8-1 comparison result.

[0344] When performing the fifth evaluation process, the third processing unit 154 may compare the fifth test score for the fifth test item with the fifth reference score, and generate a ninth comparison result when the fifth test score is less than the fifth reference score. In this embodiment, the fifth test score may include a spatiotemporal attention 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., -1.5SD).

[0345] 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 fifth test score is less than the fifth reference score. The 9-1 comparison result indicates that the user's attention and working memory have decreased. The 9-2 comparison result may be generated when the fifth test score is equal to or greater than the fifth reference score. The 9-2 comparison result indicates that the user's attention and working memory are good. In this embodiment, the ninth comparison result may be replaced with the 9-1 comparison result.

[0346] When performing the fifth 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 tenth comparison result when the seventh test score is less than the seventh reference score. In this embodiment, the seventh test score may include a Hayling 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).

[0347] 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 seventh test score is less than the seventh reference score. The tenth-1 comparison result indicates that the user's linguistic inhibition has decreased. The tenth-2 comparison result may be generated when the seventh test score is equal to or greater than the seventh reference score. The tenth-2 comparison result indicates that the user's linguistic inhibition is good. In this embodiment, the tenth comparison result may be replaced with the tenth-1 comparison result.

[0348] 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 seventh comparison result, the eighth comparison result, the ninth comparison result, and the tenth comparison result.

[0349] 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).

[0350] 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.

[0351] 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 test management unit 150, and the control unit 160 disclosed in FIGS.

[0352] 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.

[0353] 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 .

[0354] 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.

[0355] 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.

[0356] 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.

[0357] 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 presented category within a time limit and calculating a first test score.

[0358] 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 subject learn a word or picture, a test is executed for a second test item that evaluates the extent to which the learned word or picture is remembered after a predetermined time has elapsed, and a second test score is calculated.

[0359] In step S1710-3, after completing the execution of the second test step, the processor 170 can execute a test for a third test item to evaluate how accurately and quickly a user looks at a presented symbol image and selects an arbitrary number that matches the presented symbol image within a predetermined time limit, and execute a third test step to calculate a third test score.

[0360] In step S1710-4, after completing the execution of the third test step, processor 170 can execute a fourth test step in which a default presentation image is learned, a test is executed for a fourth test item which evaluates the extent to which the learned presentation image is remembered after a default time has elapsed, and a fourth test score is calculated.

[0361] In step S1710-5, after completing the execution of the fourth test step, the processor 170 can execute a fifth test step of executing a test for a fifth test item which evaluates whether the predefined presentation word and the color of the predefined presentation word are accurately pronounced, and calculating a fifth test score.

[0362] In step S1710-6, after completing the execution of the fifth test step, the processor 170 can execute a test of a sixth test item that evaluates whether the emotional state appearing in a default face presentation image is grasped, and execute a sixth test step that calculates a sixth test score.

[0363] In step S1710-7, after completing the execution of the sixth test step, the processor 170 can execute a seventh test step to execute a test of a seventh test item in which a number and a day of the week are presented and how accurately and quickly the subject can select the day of the week corresponding to the number is evaluated, and a seventh test score is calculated.

[0364] In step S1710-8, after completing the execution of the seventh inspection step, the processor 170 can execute an eighth inspection item inspection to evaluate whether the size and weight of the predetermined presented object are arranged in descending or ascending order, and execute an eighth inspection step to calculate an eighth inspection score.

[0365] In step S1710-9, after completing the execution of the eighth test step, the processor 170 can execute a ninth test step of providing an arbitrary image and a narration for the arbitrary image, executing a test for a ninth test item that evaluates the understanding of a social situation based on the collected results of the number of correct responses to questions after the provision of the narration is completed, and calculating a ninth test score.

[0366] In step S1710-10, after completing the execution of the 9th test step, the processor 170 can execute a test for a 10th test item which evaluates whether a figure of a color different from the color of the default presented figure is found, and execute a 10th test step which calculates a 10th test score.

[0367] 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.

[0368] 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 fourth test item into a first neurocognitive category that can evaluate cognitive function decline for memory.

[0369] In step S1720-2, the processor 170 can classify the sixth test item and the ninth test item into a second neurocognitive category that can evaluate cognitive decline relative to social cognition.

[0370] In step S1720-3, the processor 170 can classify the eighth test item into a third neurocognitive category that can evaluate cognitive impairment for language.

[0371] In step S1720-4, the processor 170 can classify the tenth test item into the fourth neurocognitive category, which can evaluate cognitive impairment relative to perception.

[0372] In step S1720-5, the processor 170 can classify the first test item, the third test item, the fifth test item, and the seventh test item into a fifth neurocognitive category that can evaluate cognitive impairment regarding attention execution.

[0373] 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.

[0374] 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. When executing the first evaluation process, the processor 170 can compare a fourth test score for a fourth test item with a third reference score, and generate a second comparison result when the fourth test score is less than the fourth reference score. The processor 170 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.

[0375] When evaluating whether there is a cognitive decline in memory, by using only the second and / or fourth test items out of the first to tenth 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 tenth test items, thereby improving the accuracy and reliability of the cognitive decline evaluation.

[0376] In step S1730-2, processor 170 can execute the second evaluation process. When executing the second evaluation process, processor 170 can compare a sixth inspection score for a sixth inspection item with a sixth reference score, and generate a third comparison result when the sixth inspection score is less than the sixth reference score. When executing the second evaluation process, processor 170 can compare a ninth inspection score for a ninth inspection item with a ninth reference score, and generate a fourth comparison result when the ninth inspection score is less than the ninth reference score.

[0377] The processor 170 may assess that there is cognitive decline in the second neurocognitive category, i.e., social cognition, by generating one or more of the third comparison result and the fourth comparison result.

[0378] When assessing whether there is cognitive decline in social cognition, by using only test item 6 and / or test item 9 of test items 1 to 10, 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 10, thereby improving the accuracy and reliability of the cognitive decline assessment.

[0379] 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 eighth test score for the eighth test item with an eighth reference score, and generate a fifth comparison result when the eighth test score is less than the eighth reference score. When the fifth comparison result is generated, the processor 170 can evaluate that there is cognitive impairment in the third neurocognitive category, i.e., language.

[0380] When assessing whether cognitive decline in language exists, by using only the eighth test item out of the first to tenth test items, 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 the first to tenth test items, thereby improving the accuracy and reliability of the cognitive decline assessment.

[0381] 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 tenth reference score, and generate a sixth comparison result when the fifth test score is less than the tenth reference score. When the sixth comparison result is generated, the processor 170 can evaluate that there is a cognitive decline in the fourth neurocognitive category, i.e., perception.

[0382] When evaluating whether there is cognitive decline in perception, by using only the 10th test item out of the 1st to 10th 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 1st to 10th test items, thereby improving the accuracy and reliability of the cognitive decline evaluation.

[0383] 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 a seventh comparison result when the first inspection score is less than the first reference score. When executing the fifth evaluation process, the processor 170 can compare the third inspection score for the third inspection item with the third reference score, and generate an eighth comparison result when the third inspection score is less than the third reference score. When executing the fifth evaluation process, the processor 170 can compare the fifth inspection score for the fifth inspection item with the fifth reference score, and generate a ninth comparison result when the fifth inspection score is less than the fifth reference score. When executing the fifth evaluation process, the processor 170 can compare the seventh inspection score for the seventh inspection item with the seventh reference score, and generate a tenth comparison result when the seventh inspection score is less than the seventh 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 seventh comparison result, the eighth comparison result, the ninth comparison result, and the tenth comparison result.

[0384] When evaluating whether there is a cognitive decline in attention execution, by using only the first, third, fifth and / or seventh test items out of the first to tenth 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 tenth test items, thereby improving the accuracy and reliability of the cognitive decline evaluation.

[0385] 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.

[0386] 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.

[0387] 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.

[0388] 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.

[0389] 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 ninth test step of providing an arbitrary image and a narration for the arbitrary image, and executing a test for a ninth test item for evaluating an understanding of a social situation based on a collected result of the number of correct responses to a question after the provision of the narration is completed, and calculating a ninth test score. Testing methods for assessing cognitive decline.

2. The inspection step includes: a third test step of executing a test for a third test item for evaluating how accurately and quickly the user can select an arbitrary number that matches a presented symbol image within a predetermined time limit by looking at the presented symbol image, and calculating a third test score; The method for evaluating cognitive decline according to claim 1.

3. The third inspection step includes: displaying an arbitrary symbol image in the center of the screen, and providing a third instruction sentence for allowing the player to select an arbitrary number that matches the arbitrary symbol image within a third time limit; storing a selection result for any number that is matched to the same image as the any symbol image in response to the third instruction sentence; and calculating the third test score by comparing the selection result for the number with a correct answer. The method for evaluating cognitive decline according to claim 2.

4. prior to the step of providing the third instruction, Further comprising the step of providing a method for performing the third inspection step by text and images, and performing a practice inspection for the third inspection step. The method for evaluating cognitive decline according to claim 3.

5. The inspection step includes: a sixth test step of executing a test for a sixth test item for evaluating whether the user can grasp an emotional state appearing in a predetermined face presentation image, and calculating a sixth test score; The method for evaluating cognitive decline according to claim 1.

6. The sixth inspection step includes: providing the predetermined face-presentation image expressing an emotion and a plurality of emotion buttons for selecting an emotion state shown in the predetermined face-presentation image, and providing a sixth instruction sentence for selecting an emotion state shown in the predetermined face-presentation image with any one of the plurality of emotion buttons; receiving a result of selecting an emotional state shown in the predetermined face presentation image by using any one of the plurality of emotion buttons in response to the sixth instruction sentence, and comparing the selected result with a correct answer to calculate the sixth test score. The method for evaluating cognitive decline according to claim 5.

7. prior to the step of providing the sixth instruction providing a method for performing the sixth inspection step in a text and performing a practice inspection for the sixth inspection step; The method for evaluating cognitive decline according to claim 6.

8. The inspection step includes: a seventh test step of executing a test for a seventh test item that evaluates how accurately and quickly the user can select a number presented within a predetermined time limit, and how accurately and quickly the user can select a day of the week corresponding to the number by presenting the number and a day of the week, and calculating a seventh test score; The method for evaluating cognitive decline according to claim 1.

9. The seventh inspection step includes: 7-1 includes an inspection step, The 7-1 inspection step includes: Providing a 7-1 instruction sentence that causes an arbitrary number indicated as "start" to be selected within a 7-1 time limit and other numbers presented to be selected in descending or ascending order; A step of selecting an arbitrary number indicated as "start" in response to the 7-1 instruction sentence, and storing the result of selecting other presented numbers in descending or ascending order; and counting the time that has elapsed until the result of selecting the other numbers in ascending or descending order is the correct answer, and calculating a seventh-1 test score. The method for evaluating cognitive decline according to claim 8.

10. The seventh inspection step includes: A 7-2 inspection step is performed when the 7-1 inspection step is completed; The 7-2 inspection step includes: providing a seventh-second instruction sentence for allowing the user to alternately select an arbitrary number and a day of the week corresponding to the arbitrary number from the numbers and days of the week presented within a seventh-second time limit; a step of storing a result of alternately selecting the arbitrary number and the day of the week corresponding to the arbitrary number in response to the 7-2 instruction sentence; and counting the time that has elapsed until the result of alternately selecting the days of the week corresponding to the arbitrary numbers is correct, and calculating a seventh-2 test score. The method for evaluating cognitive decline according to claim 9.

11. Before the 7-1 inspection step, The method further includes providing a method for performing the 7-1 test step in a text and performing a practice test for the 7-1 test step; Before the 7-2 inspection step, The method for performing the 7-2 test step is provided in a text, and a practice test for the 7-2 test step is further included. The method for evaluating cognitive decline according to claim 10.

12. The ninth inspection step includes: providing a narration for the main image while presenting any one of the main images, and providing a ninth instruction sentence for allowing the user to select an answer to a question while viewing a plurality of sub-images included in the main image after the provision of the narration is completed; storing a selection of an answer to the question corresponding to the ninth instruction sentence; and calculating the ninth test score by comparing the answer selection to the question with a correct answer. The method for evaluating cognitive decline according to claim 1.

13. prior to the step of providing the ninth instruction, Further comprising the step of providing a method for performing the ninth inspection step with text and images, and performing a practice inspection for the ninth inspection step. The method for evaluating cognitive decline according to claim 12.

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

15. 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 inspection process includes: A ninth test step of providing an arbitrary image and a narration for the arbitrary image, and executing a test for a ninth test item for evaluating an understanding of a social situation based on a collected result of the number of correct responses to a question after the provision of the narration is completed, and calculating a ninth test score. A testing device for assessing cognitive decline.

Images