Testing method and apparatus for evaluating cognitive decline

Abstract

To provide an inspection method and device for assessing deterioration of a cognitive function.SOLUTION: An inspection method for assessing deterioration of a cognitive function comprises: an inspection step for inspecting a user to see how well the user perform a mission presented for each of a plurality of inspection items, and calculating an inspection score for each of the plurality of inspection items; a categorization step for classifying at least one of the plurality of inspection items into one of a plurality of neurocognitive categories; and an assessing step for assessing whether or not a cognitive function deteriorates in the neurocognitive category, based on the inspection scores for the inspection items classified into the neurocognitive categories.SELECTED DRAWING: Figure 17

Description

TECHNICAL FIELD

[0001] The present invention relates to a testing method and apparatus for evaluating cognitive function decline. BACKGROUND ART

[0002] As the aging society continues, the number of dementia patients is increasing rapidly. However, there are no therapeutic drugs for dementia. Therefore, the most innovative countermeasure against dementia is to detect mild cognitive impairment, which has a high possibility of progressing to dementia, at an early stage and administer preventive treatment. Mild cognitive impairment refers to a state of a high-risk group in the pre-dementia stage. It is reported that about 10 to 15% of patients with mild cognitive impairment develop dementia.

[0003] However, there is no standardized diagnostic method for mild cognitive impairment, and doctors examine patients in person and make judgments by comprehensively investigating the patients' conditions. Conventional tests for evaluating cognitive function decline are mainly configured around tests that evaluate memory, and are effective tests for evaluating Alzheimer's dementia characterized by memory decline, but there is a problem that the accuracy decreases when evaluating other types of dementia characterized by declines in cognitive functions other than memory.

[0004] The above-mentioned background art is technical information that the inventor possessed for deriving the present invention or acquired during the derivation process of the present invention, and is not necessarily known art that was publicly disclosed to the general public before the filing of the present invention. PRIOR ART DOCUMENTS PATENT DOCUMENTS

[0005] PATENT DOCUMENT 1 Korean Domestic Laid-Open Patent Publication No. 10-2018-0109529 (published Oct. 8, 2018) SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION PROBLEMS TO BE SOLVED BY THE INVENTION

[0006] One objective of this invention is to provide an explicit and easy-to-understand user interface for online assessments of cognitive decline.

[0007] One objective of this invention is to enable users to directly intervene and perform tests during online assessments of cognitive decline, thereby minimizing the intervention of the examiner.

[0008] One objective of this invention is to enable immediate confirmation of test results after an online assessment of cognitive decline is completed, and to allow for tracking of previously stored results.

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

[0010] A method for evaluating cognitive decline according to one embodiment of the present invention is a method for evaluating cognitive decline performed by a processor of a testing device for evaluating cognitive decline, and includes: a testing step of testing the extent 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 category classification 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 a neurocognitive category based on the test scores for the test items classified into the neurocognitive category.

[0011] A testing device for evaluating 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, the memory being able to store code that, when executed via the processor, performs a testing process to the extent to which the user performs a mission presented by the processor for each of a plurality of testing items, calculates a test score for each of the plurality of testing items, performs a category classification process to classify at least one of the plurality of testing items into one of a plurality of neurocognitive categories, and performs an evaluation process to evaluate whether or not there is cognitive decline in a neurocognitive category based on the test scores for the test items classified into the neurocognitive category.

[0012] In addition, other methods for implementing the present invention, other systems, and computer-readable recording media storing computer programs for performing the said methods can also be provided.

[0013] Other aspects, features, and advantages not mentioned above will become clear from the following drawings, claims, and detailed description of the invention. [Effects of the Invention]

[0014] According to the present invention, by providing an explicit and easy-to-understand user interface for online cognitive decline assessment tests, elderly users can perform cognitive decline assessment tests without difficulty.

[0015] Furthermore, when conducting online cognitive decline assessments, the accuracy of the assessment for the user can be improved by allowing the user to directly participate in the assessment and minimizing the examiner's intervention.

[0016] Furthermore, after the online test for evaluating cognitive decline is completed, the test results can be checked immediately, and stored past results can be reviewed and tracked, whereby rapid and accurate diagnosis and preventive measures can be provided to the patient.

[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] Figure 1 is an exemplary diagram of a test environment for evaluating cognitive decline according to the present embodiment. [Figure 2] Figure 2 is a block diagram shown for schematically explaining the configuration of a test device for evaluating cognitive decline according to the present embodiment. [Figure 3] Figure 3 is a block diagram shown for schematically explaining the configuration of a test management unit in the test device for evaluating cognitive decline of Figure 2. [Figure 4] Figure 4 is an exemplary diagram of a screen provided to a user terminal for performing a test for evaluating cognitive decline according to the present embodiment. [Figure 5] Figure 5A to Figure 5H are exemplary diagrams of screens provided to a user terminal for performing a test for evaluating cognitive decline according to the present embodiment. [Figure 6] Figure 6A to Figure 6H are exemplary diagrams of screens provided to a user terminal for performing a test for evaluating cognitive decline according to the present embodiment. [Figure 7] Figure 7A to Figure 7K are exemplary diagrams of screens provided to a user terminal for performing a test for evaluating cognitive decline according to the present embodiment. [Figure 8] Figure 8A to Figure 8H are exemplary diagrams of screens provided to a user terminal for performing a test for evaluating cognitive decline according to the present embodiment. [Figure 9]FIGS. 9A to 9O are exemplary diagrams of screens provided to a user terminal for performing a test for evaluating cognitive decline according to the present embodiment. [Figure 10] FIGS. 10A to 10G are exemplary diagrams of screens provided to a user terminal for performing a test for evaluating cognitive decline according to the present embodiment. [Figure 11] FIGS. 11A to 11U are exemplary diagrams of screens provided to a user terminal for performing a test for evaluating cognitive decline according to the present embodiment. [Figure 12] FIGS. 12A to 12N are exemplary diagrams of screens provided to a user terminal for performing a test for evaluating cognitive decline according to the present embodiment. [Figure 13] FIGS. 13A to 13I are exemplary diagrams of screens provided to a user terminal for performing a test for evaluating cognitive decline according to the present embodiment. [Figure 14] FIGS. 14A to 14G are exemplary diagrams of screens provided to a user terminal for performing a test for evaluating cognitive decline according to the present embodiment. [Figure 15] FIGS. 15A to 15J are exemplary diagrams of screens provided to a user terminal for performing a test for evaluating cognitive decline according to the present embodiment. [Figure 16] FIG. 16 is a block diagram shown for schematically illustrating the configuration of a test apparatus for evaluating cognitive decline according to another embodiment. [Figure 17] FIG. 17 is a flowchart for illustrating a test method for evaluating cognitive decline according to the present embodiment. [Figure 18] FIG. 18 is a flowchart for illustrating a test method for evaluating cognitive decline according to the present embodiment. [Figure 19] FIG. 19 is a flowchart for illustrating a test method for evaluating cognitive decline according to the present embodiment. [Figure 20] FIG. 20 is a flowchart for illustrating a test method for evaluating cognitive decline according to the present embodiment. [Modes for carrying out the invention]

[0019] The advantages and features of the present invention, as well as methods for achieving them, will become clearer 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 can be implemented in a variety of different forms, and should be understood to include all transformations, equivalents, and substitutions that fall within the spirit and technical scope of the invention. The embodiments presented below are provided to complete the disclosure of the present invention and to fully inform those who are ordinary skill in the art to which the invention pertains of the invention. Where it is determined that a specific description of the relevant prior art would hinder the essence of the invention, such detailed description will be omitted in describing the present invention.

[0020] The terms used in this application are used solely to describe specific embodiments and are not intended to limit the invention. Singular expressions include plural expressions unless the context clearly indicates otherwise. In this application, terms such as “includes” or “having” specify the presence of features, figures, steps, actions, components, parts, or combinations thereof described herein, and should be understood not to preemptively exclude the possibility of the presence or addition of one or more other features, figures, steps, actions, components, parts, or combinations thereof. Terms such as “first,” “second,” etc., may be used to describe various components, but components should not be limited by such terms. Such terms are used solely for the purpose of distinguishing one component from another.

[0021] Furthermore, in this application, “part” may be a hardware component such as a processor or circuit and / or a software component executed by a hardware component such as a processor.

[0022] Hereinafter, embodiments of the present invention will be described in detail with reference to the attached drawings. In describing these embodiments with reference to the attached drawings, the same drawing number will be assigned to identical or corresponding components, and redundant descriptions thereof will be omitted.

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

[0024] The inspection device 100 can perform an inspection process that checks how well a user performs the missions presented for each of several inspection items, and calculates an inspection score for each of the multiple inspection items. In this embodiment, the inspection process can be expressed as an inspection step in the claims described later.

[0025] In this embodiment, the inspection device 100 can perform an inspection process including a first inspection process to a tenth inspection process.

[0026] The first testing process may include a process of administering a test on a first test item that evaluates how well the subject performs the task of uttering words corresponding to a predetermined presented category and drawing an instructed design within a time limit (e.g., 30 seconds), and calculating a first test score. Here, the first test item may include a fluency test.

[0027] Fluency tests can be administered to measure cognitive flexibility, which constitutes executive function. Fluency tests assess how naturally cognitive flexibility is calculated within a limited time. Fluency tests can include verbal fluency tests, which involve assigning categorical and spelling tasks within a given time and calculating as many words as possible, and visual perceptual fluency tests, which involve connecting 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 often tend to show significant impairment in both types of verbal fluency and tasks.

[0028] The first testing process may include a process of administering a test on a first test item that evaluates the extent to which the user can perform utterances of words corresponding to predetermined presented categories within a first time limit, and calculating a first test score. Here, the first test item may include a verbal fluency test. Thus, the first testing process may include a process of administering a verbal fluency test to the user and calculating a first test score.

[0029] The differences between the fluency test included in the first testing process according to this embodiment and conventional fluency tests are as follows: Conventional fluency tests involve the examiner writing down the words spoken by the user on a test sheet. On the other hand, the fluency test according to this embodiment can record what the user says using a speech recognition module (not shown), convert it to text in real time, and then apply a fluency evaluation model based on this to evaluate the user's level of language fluency. By weighting the process of converting to text using the speech recognition module, it is possible to prevent the user's responses from being inaccurately transcribed. The words that the user must respond to are words that belong to a specific category, such as animals, fruits, or clothes, and any category is acceptable as long as it can contain multiple noun words.

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

[0031] The second testing process can be performed after the first testing process has been completed. The second testing process may include a process of administering a test on a second test item that involves providing cues from a predetermined category to learn a word or picture, evaluating how well the learned word or picture is remembered after a predetermined time (e.g., 20 minutes), and calculating a second test score. Here, the second test item may include a verbal cue memory test.

[0032] The formation of long-term memories, including episodic memories, can occur through the processes of 1) encoding, 2) storage and retention, and 3) retrieval. Memory assessments, based on a detailed and comprehensive evaluation of these three steps, can determine the presence, degree, or characteristics of damage to episodic memory. By determining whether a retrieval failure or a problem with memory strategies is occurring through verbal-cued memory tests, memory function can be accurately assessed. Furthermore, verbal-cued memory tests can have diagnostic value in identifying types of dementia.

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

[0034] The 2-1 testing process may include a process of administering tests on 2-1 test items that assess the extent to which a person is able to learn words or pictures in response to cues from a predetermined category, and calculating a 2-1 test score. Here, the 2-1 test items may include learning tests within the language-cued memory tests. Thus, the 2-1 testing process may include a process of administering learning tests within the language-cued memory tests to the user and calculating a 2-1 test score.

[0035] The 2-2 inspection process can be executed after the 2-1 inspection process has been completed and a predetermined time has elapsed. In this embodiment, other inspection processes can be executed from the time the 2-1 inspection process is completed until the predetermined time. For example, instead of executing the 2-2 inspection process after the 2-1 inspection process is completed, the 2-2 inspection process can be executed after the 2-1 inspection process is completed and the 3 inspection process is executed.

[0036] The 2-2 test process may include a process of administering a test on a 2-2 test item that evaluates how well a user remembers a word or picture learned in the 2-1 test process after a predetermined amount of time has elapsed, and calculating a 2-2 test score. Here, the 2-2 test item may include a recognition test from the language cue memory test. Thus, the 2-2 test process may include a process of administering a recognition test from the language cue memory test to the user and calculating a 2-2 test score.

[0037] In the verbal-cued memory test included in the second testing process according to this embodiment, short-term and long-term memory can be formed through the processes of 1) encoding, 2) storage and retention, and 3) retrieval. Furthermore, based on a detailed and comprehensive evaluation of the three processes described above, a memory assessment can be performed, including the presence, degree, or characteristics of short-term memory damage. The verbal-cued memory test according to this embodiment allows for an accurate understanding of memory function and ensures diagnostic value in evaluating the type of dementia. Here, an accurate understanding of memory function includes understanding whether the problem is a retrieval failure or a problem with memory strategies.

[0038] The differences between the language-cued memory test included in the second testing process according to this embodiment and a conventional language-cued memory test are as follows: Conventional language-cued memory tests can be described as tests that ask the test-taker to recall multiple words or pictures and confirm how many words can be recalled. However, the language-cued memory test according to this embodiment provides cues that indicate the category to which the words belong to enable learning, and even during free recall, questions can be asked while indicating the category to which the words belong.

[0039] The verbal cue memory test included in the second testing process according to this embodiment can be used to evaluate the normal group against mild cognitive impairment and the normal group against Alzheimer's disease dementia. The verbal cue memory test according to this embodiment can show a significant correlation with the gray matter volume of the parahippocampus, a brain region associated with the memory of illustrations. Therefore, the verbal cue memory test according to this embodiment can accurately evaluate verbal memory ability in a short amount of time.

[0040] In this embodiment, the verbal cue memory test included in the second testing process can be developed into a word interference memory test. The word interference memory test can be described as a verbal memory test that measures recent memory based on the list-learning paradigm. The list-learning paradigm is a paradigm widely used for assessing recent memory and can typically consist of a procedure in which a series of word lists are memorized and then recognized or recalled. The word interference memory test first presents an initial word list (list A, hereinafter referred to as the first list) in opposition to measure the ability to recognize the learned words (maximum learning amount). Next, a new word list (list B, hereinafter referred to as the second list) semantically associated with the first list (list A) is presented, and the ability to recognize the newly learned words (interference suppression) can be measured. 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 characteristic memory storage and presentation process problems in Alzheimer's dementia and is known as an important cognitive marker that predicts very early Alzheimer's disease. Word interference memory tests can be configured to sensitively detect memory problems that may appear in early Alzheimer's disease by measuring the ability to suppress proactive semantic interference and distinguish new information, along with maximum learning capacity.

[0041] The conventional LASSI-L (Loewenstein-Acevedo Scales for Semantic Interference and Learning) test requires the recall of a total of 15 words belonging to one of three semantic categories. However, the word interference memory test according to this embodiment reduces the number of words to be memorized to a total of 8, taking into account the overall educational background and daily functional level of elderly Koreans. Furthermore, it applies the concepts of shopping lists and shopping baskets, which are familiar to elderly Koreans, and is composed of familiar and concrete words. In addition, to enable easy scoring and scoring in a digital environment, it applies a recognition paradigm (a method of judging whether a presented word is a word that has been memorized or not) rather than the recall paradigm (a method of directly recalling and speaking the words to be memorized) used in conventional tests. Moreover, by presenting words included in the first list as non-target words that must be eliminated during the recognition of the second list, it is possible to measure proactive semantic interference 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 true positive responses, and the number of true negative responses can be calculated. Here, the recognition score is one embodiment, and can be calculated by subtracting a baseline value (e.g., 4) from the sum of the number of true positive responses and true negative responses. Second, the recognition score for the second list, the number of true positive responses, the number of 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, a higher overall recognition score indicates better linguistic memory ability. A higher recognition score for the first list indicates a higher maximum learnable linguistic memory capacity. A higher recognition score for the second list indicates a better 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 inspection process can be performed after the execution of the second-first inspection process is completed. The third inspection process may include a process of performing an inspection on a third inspection item that evaluates how accurately and quickly a user can select any number that matches the presented symbol image within a predetermined time limit (e.g., 45 seconds) and calculating a third inspection score. Here, the third inspection item may include a symbol-digit matching test. Thus, the third inspection process may include a process of performing a symbol-digit matching test on the user and calculating a third inspection score.

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

[0045] The differences between the symbol-digit matching test included in the third testing process of this embodiment and the conventional symbol-digit writing test are as follows: Conventional symbol-digit matching tests are conducted using a paper-pen method, where the user looks at a number-symbol chart connected at the top of the paper and handwrites the symbol that matches the number in the blank space below the number written in the response section at the bottom. The symbol-digit matching test according to this embodiment displays one of the symbols from the symbol set in the center of the screen, and the user touches the number that matches that symbol in the response section below where the number-symbol is connected. The method for generating the symbol set displayed in the center of the screen is as follows: The symbol can be generated in the shape of a square, with four vertices and all combinations of straight and curved lines passing through the 1 / 2 position of the four vertices. Conventional symbol-digit writing tests require the use of writing instruments to create answers, and therefore may require writing ability. However, the symbol-digit matching test according to this embodiment can focus on the function of processing visual information. The symbols used in the symbol-digit matching test according to this embodiment cannot be verbalized, taking into consideration the copyright of existing symbols, and newly created simple forms of symbols can be applied. The initial questions can be designed to allow players to select symbols that are close together, resulting in an easy difficulty level. As the game progresses to later questions, the difficulty can be increased by requiring players to explore all symbols.

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

[0047] The fourth test process can be performed after the execution of the second-second test process has been completed. The fourth test process may include a process of performing a test on a fourth test item that involves learning a predetermined presentation image and evaluating how well the learned presentation image is remembered after a predetermined time (e.g., 20 minutes), and calculating a fourth test score. Here, the fourth test item may include a visual diagram memory test.

[0048] The Free and Cued Selective Reminding Test, developed by Buschke (1984), is a verbal memory test that provides categorical cues related to words, generates associations for recall during the learning process, and utilizes these associations during retrieval. Traditional memory tests based on free recall tasks cannot distinguish between decreased efficiency and impaired memory storage due to damage to memory structures, such as the use of inefficient strategies or reduced processing capacity during the memory process. Furthermore, poor performance on free recall tasks is not necessarily characteristic of dementia; similar results can be observed in aging or depression. However, impairment in cued recall tasks can be more characteristic of the early diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease. Only by including a process in the learning process—the encoding step—of categorizing multiple words into a single semantic cluster and immediately recalling it can we prevent decreased efficiency in the encoding process and detect the problem of memory decline itself due to abnormalities in memory structures. Memory tests using such cued recall tasks mostly use word stimuli and semantic cues. However, picture stimuli can assess a patient's visual perception ability and are more familiar and accessible to illiterate elderly individuals compared to word stimuli. In the visual diagram memory test according to this embodiment, a visual verbal memory task was constructed using picture stimuli, and the task was designed to enhance memory efficiency using picture stimuli and diagrammatic cues. The results of the study showed that the immediate free recall task in the visual diagram memory test according to this embodiment successfully distinguished between three groups: normal, mild cognitive impairment, and Alzheimer's disease, and the learning task best distinguished Lewy body dementia from the other groups based on the attribute of visual recognition. In the visual diagram memory test according to this embodiment, differences between the groups were clearly expressed in the subtests, 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 the 4-1 inspection process and the 4-2 inspection process.

[0050] The 4-1 test process can be performed after the completion of the 2-2 test process. The 4-1 test process may include a process of performing an examination on the 4-1 test item, in which a predefined first presented image is shown and visual perceptual stimuli are input through the process of identifying the number of colors in the first presented image, and calculating the 4-1 test score. Here, the 4-1 test item may include a learning test among visual diagrammatic memory tests. Accordingly, the 3-1 test process may include a process of performing a learning test among visual diagrammatic memory tests on the user and calculating the 4-1 test score.

[0051] The 4-2 inspection process can be executed after the 4-1 inspection process has been completed and a predetermined time has elapsed. In this embodiment, other inspection processes can be executed from the time the 3-1 inspection process is completed until the predetermined time. For example, instead of executing the 4-2 inspection process after the 4-1 inspection process is completed, the 5th to 7th inspection processes can be executed first, and then the 4-2 inspection process can be executed. In this embodiment, the procedure for executing the inspection processes can be as follows: First, the 1st inspection process is executed, then the 2-1st inspection process is executed, then the 3rd inspection process is executed, then the 2-2nd inspection process is executed, then the 4-1st inspection process is executed, then the 5th to 7th inspection processes are executed sequentially, then the 4-2nd inspection process is executed, then the 3-2nd inspection process is executed, and then the 8th to 10th inspection processes are executed sequentially.

[0052] In this embodiment, it is disclosed that the 2-2 inspection process is always executed after the completion of the 3 inspection process, and the 4-2 inspection process is always executed after the completion of the 7 inspection process, but this is not limited to this. That is, the 2-2 inspection process and the 4-2 inspection process may also be executed after the completion of any one of the 3 to 10 inspection processes.

[0053] The 4-2 testing process may include a process for performing a test on a 4-2 test item that evaluates how well the presented images learned in the 4-1 testing process are remembered after a predetermined time has elapsed, and for calculating a 4-2 test score. Here, the 4-2 test item may include a recognition test from the visual diagram memory tests. Thus, the 4-2 testing process may include a process for performing a recognition test from the visual diagram memory tests on the user and for calculating a 4-2 test score.

[0054] The differences between the visual diagram memory test included in the fourth testing process according to this embodiment and conventional visual diagram memory tests are as follows: The visual diagram memory test according to this embodiment can eliminate interference from semantic memory by using abstract images that cannot be verbalized. Images can also be configured as a set by varying their color, pattern, and degree of overlap. Furthermore, when performing a recognition test within the visual diagram memory test, images included in the same set as learned images can be presented as interference images. In addition, by arbitrarily selecting and presenting images within a set containing the same cues, the learning effect of selecting familiar images through past test executions can be eliminated.

[0055] The fifth test process can be performed after the completion of the fourth-order test process. The fifth test process may include a process of performing a test on the fifth test item, which evaluates whether the subject correctly pronounces a given given word and the color of that given given word, and calculating the fifth test score. Here, the fifth test item may include the Stroop test.

[0056] The Stroop test can measure the ability to suppress responses unrelated to the target response and maintain the target. The Stroop test shows a significant difference in test performance between dementia patients and healthy elderly individuals, making it an efficient indicator for distinguishing between dementia patients and healthy elderly individuals.

[0057] In this embodiment, the fifth inspection process may include the fifth-first inspection process and the fifth-second inspection process.

[0058] The 5-1 testing process may include a process for performing a test on a 5-1 test item that evaluates whether a predefined word is pronounced correctly, and for calculating a 5-1 test score. Here, the 5-1 test item may include the Stroop Test I. Thus, the 5-1 process may include a process for performing the Stroop Test I on the user and for calculating a 5-1 test score.

[0059] The 5-2 testing process may include a process of performing a test on a 5-2 test item that evaluates whether the user correctly pronounces the color of a given presented word, and calculating a 5-2 test score. Here, the 5-2 test item may include the Second Stroop Test. Thus, the 5-2 process may include a process of performing the Second Stroop Test on the user and calculating a 5-2 test score.

[0060] The differences between the Stroop test included in the fifth testing process according to this embodiment and the conventional Stroop test are as follows: The conventional Stroop test is performed using a test paper, in which the tester reads aloud presented words in sequence, and the number of words read correctly is counted to calculate the test score. However, the Stroop test according to this embodiment can include a word reading task in which the tester selects the same word as the word with the color name written on it, and a color reading task in which the tester selects the word that matches the color of the word. The Stroop test according to this embodiment can shorten the execution time, taking into account the time required to show a significant test result, 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 has been completed. The sixth test process may include a process of performing a test on a sixth test item that evaluates whether or not the user recognizes the emotional state expressed in a predetermined face presentation image, and calculating a sixth test score. Here, the sixth test item may include a face emotion test. Thus, the sixth test process may include a process of performing a face emotion test on the user and calculating a sixth test score.

[0062] Generally, dementia patients may experience emotional recognition impairment due to changes in cognitive function. Furthermore, dementia patients may have difficulty exchanging emotions with others compared to healthy individuals, and may also experience a decrease in empathy in interpersonal relationships. In particular, frontotemporal dementia (FTD) can manifest as behavioral changes in interpersonal relationships, such as apathy, errors in social processing, and impaired social perception. Additionally, frontotemporal dementia patients may exhibit reduced facial emotion recognition compared to the normal population. In response to this, the facial recognition test in this embodiment provides multiple images of a first face presentation containing six basic emotions (happy, scared, sad, angry, bitter, surprised) and multiple images of a second face presentation that contain no emotion, i.e., emotionless, allowing for confirmation of the ability to sensitively recognize the emotions contained in each facial expression.

[0063] The differences between the facial emotion test included in the sixth examination process according to this embodiment and conventional facial emotion tests are as follows: Conventional facial recognition tests were a method of finding the exact emotion by looking at facial expression photographs. However, the facial recognition test according to this embodiment presents the intensity of emotions in stages and can rate matching emotions. In addition, the facial emotion test can distinguish between weak and strong emotions to the extent that, and can smooth out the difference between positive and negative emotions. Furthermore, the difference score (contrast) calculated by the facial recognition test can be said to be useful in differentiating between major depressive disorder and FTD. The facial recognition test can present stimuli with a balanced ratio of males and females to eliminate gender bias in response to stimuli.

[0064] The seventh inspection process can be performed after the sixth inspection process has been completed. The seventh inspection process may include a process of performing an inspection on seven inspection items that evaluate how accurately and quickly a person can select a number presented within a predetermined time limit, and how accurately and quickly they can select the corresponding day of the week when presented with a number and a day of the week, and then calculating the seventh inspection score. Here, the seventh inspection item may include a trailmaking inspection.

[0065] The Trail Making Test can be a test designed to assess visual concepts and visual-motor abilities. Trail Making Tests can include number-connecting tests and number-alphabet-connecting tests. A number-alphabet-connecting test involves drawing lines to connect circles, some numbered and others lettered, alternating between the two in the correct order. Trail Making Tests may require a comprehensive assessment of visual perception, visual search, motor speed, complex visual scanning, and agility. Furthermore, number-alphabet-connecting tests may require cognitive functions 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 the seventh-first inspection process and the seventh-second inspection process.

[0067] The 7-1 testing process may include a process of performing a test on a 7-1 test item that evaluates how accurately and quickly a user selects any number displayed as "Start" within a 7-1 time limit and how quickly they select other presented numbers in descending or ascending order, and calculating a 7-1 test score. Here, the 7-1 test item may include a digit concatenation test. Thus, the 7-1 testing process may include a process of performing a linguistic digit concatenation test on the user and calculating a 7-1 test score.

[0068] The 7-2 inspection process may include a process of performing an inspection on a 7-2 inspection item that presents numbers and days of the week and evaluates how accurately and quickly a user selects the corresponding day of the week within a 7-2 time limit, and calculating a 7-2 inspection score. Here, the 7-2 inspection item may include a number-day of the week matching test. Thus, the 7-2 inspection process may include a process of performing a graphic number-day of the week matching test on the user and calculating a 7-2 inspection score.

[0069] Unlike conventional trail-making tests, the trail-making test according to this embodiment was developed as a digital version of a Korean-style elderly trail-making test, taking into account the characteristics of elderly Koreans by replacing the alphabet with familiar days of the week (Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday, Friday, Saturday, Sunday).

[0070] The eighth inspection process can be performed after the completion of the fourth-second inspection process. The eighth inspection process can perform an inspection on the eighth inspection item, which evaluates whether to sort the predetermined presented objects in descending or ascending order of size, and calculate the eighth inspection score. Here, the eighth inspection item may include size and weight inspection.

[0071] The size-weight test is a verbal test that assesses semantic memory by presenting three animals and three objects and arranging them by size and weight. A Korean version of the size-weight test was developed, modified to be familiar to elderly Koreans, and its validity was evaluated. The study results showed a significant difference in test scores between the normal group and those with Alzheimer's disease (AD), allowing for differentiation between the two groups. Furthermore, a significant difference in test scores was also observed between Alzheimer's disease and primary progressive semantic aphasia (SV-PPA), allowing for differentiation between the two clinical groups. Brain imaging results from SV-PPA patients showed a significant correlation between test scores and the volume of gray matter in the right inferior frontal cortex and bilateral temporal cortices, brain regions involved in recalling semantic information.

[0072] In this embodiment, the eighth inspection process may include the eighth-first inspection process and the eighth-second inspection process.

[0073] The 8-1 inspection process can perform an inspection on an 8-1 inspection item that evaluates whether to sort the sizes of predefined presented objects in descending or ascending order, and calculate an 8-1 inspection score. Here, the 8-1 inspection item may include a size inspection. Thus, the 8-1 inspection process may include a process to perform a size inspection on the user and calculate an 8-1 inspection score.

[0074] The 8-2 inspection process can perform an inspection on an 8-2 inspection item that evaluates whether to sort the weights of predefined presented objects in descending or ascending order, and calculate an 8-2 inspection score. Here, the 8-2 inspection item may include a weight inspection. Thus, the 8-2 inspection process may include a process to perform a weight inspection on the user and calculate an 8-2 inspection score.

[0075] The differences between the size and weight inspection included in the eighth inspection process according to this embodiment and conventional size and weight inspections are as follows: The size and weight inspection according to this embodiment classifies objects according to their size and objects according to their weight into multiple categories (e.g., five), and the difficulty level can be configured as low / medium / high through level divisions between categories. Combinations of categories with large differences in weight and size may have a low difficulty level. Combinations of categories with small differences in weight and size may have a high difficulty level. In addition, the initial part can consist of easy questions, and the later part can consist of difficult questions. The image of the object can be a drawing made of lines, and can be configured to clearly show the characteristics of the object (e.g., animal, object, etc.). In addition, objects that are unfamiliar to elderly Koreans can be excluded.

[0076] The ninth test process can be performed after the execution of 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, performing a test on a ninth test item that evaluates the degree of understanding of social situations based on the results of collecting correct responses to questions after the narration has been 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 performing a theory of mind test on the user and calculating a ninth test score.

[0077] Social cognition is the ability to perceive, interpret, and process social information constantly encountered in daily life. Theory of mind refers to the ability to decipher or infer the mental states of others, such as beliefs, needs, and intentions, enabling us to understand others and predict their behavior. Theory of mind tests can consist of cognitive and emotional aspects. Theory of mind tests can be designed to assess an individual's understanding of and ability to cope with social situations based on theory of mind.

[0078] The differences between the theory of mind test included in the ninth test process according to this embodiment and the conventional picture arrangement test are as follows. The conventional picture arrangement test (WAIS-R) is a test that checks whether a person understands a social situation by arranging given pictures in order to match the flow of a story. However, the conventional picture arrangement test is difficult for elderly people and is difficult to perform. Therefore, the theory of mind test according to this embodiment can be composed of a test that modifies the story to be easier for the elderly and asks about the degree to which the person understands the intentions of the characters, the social situation, and the emotions of the characters from the content presented in each scene.

[0079] The 10th test process can be executed after the 9th test process has been completed. The 10th test process may include a process of performing a test on a 10th test item that evaluates whether or not a person can find a shape that is a different color from the color of a predetermined presented shape, and calculating a 10th test score. Here, the 10th test item may include a color perception test. Thus, the 10th test process may include a process of performing a color perception test on the user and calculating a 10th test score.

[0080] The differences between the color perception test included in the 10th testing process according to this embodiment and conventional color perception tests are as follows: The Farnsworth Munsell 100 hue test, a conventional color perception test, divides similar colors into four color regions based on three attributes of color: hue, saturation, and lightness. The user checks whether they can distinguish the difference between colors by arranging them in order based on the colors at both ends. On the other hand, the color perception test according to this embodiment can be constructed by selecting colors based on the green and blue color systems, taking into consideration that Parkinson's disease dementia patients have difficulty distinguishing between blue and green. The color perception test according to this embodiment does not use the method of arranging all colors as in conventional tests, but rather selects two colors, and the difficulty level is set higher for colors with a small difference and lower for colors with a large difference.

[0081] After the first to tenth testing processes are completed, the testing device 100 can perform a category classification process to classify at least one of the multiple testing items into one of the multiple neurocognitive categories. In this embodiment, the category classification process can be expressed as a category classification step in the claims described later.

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

[0083] The testing device 100 can classify the 6th test item (facial emotion test) and the 9th test item (theory of mind test) into a second neurocognitive category that can differentiate neurocognitive disorders related to 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 decline in relation to language.

[0085] The testing device 100 can classify the 10th test item (color perception test) into the 4th neurocognitive category, which can evaluate cognitive decline in perception.

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

[0087] After the category classification process is completed, the testing device 100 can perform an evaluation process to assess 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 described later.

[0088] The testing device 100 can perform a first evaluation process to assess whether or not there is a decline in cognitive function in the first neurocognitive category as memory, based on the second test score (verbal cue memory test score) and the fourth test score (visual diagram memory test score).

[0089] The testing device 100 can perform a second evaluation process to assess whether there is a decline in cognitive function in the 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 assess whether or not there is a decline in cognitive function in the third neurocognitive category 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 assess whether or not there is a decline in cognitive function in the fourth neurocognitive category as perception, based on the tenth test score (color perception test score).

[0092] The testing device 100 can perform a fifth assessment process to evaluate whether there is a cognitive impairment in the fifth neurocognitive category as attention execution, based on the first test score (fluency test score), the third test score (symbol-number matching test score), the fifth test score (Stroop test score), and the seventh test score (trailmaking test score).

[0093] In this embodiment, the testing device 100 may exist independently in server form, or the testing functions for evaluating cognitive decline provided by the testing device 100 may be implemented as an application and installed on the user terminal 200.

[0094] The user terminal 200 can access the testing application and / or testing site provided by the testing device 100 for evaluating cognitive decline and receive testing services for evaluating cognitive decline. Here, the user terminal 200 may include a terminal owned by the user undergoing the test, i.e., the subject.

[0095] Such user terminals 200 may include communication terminals capable of performing the functions of computing devices (not shown), and may be, but not limited to, desktop computers 201, smartphones 202, and notebook computers 203 operated by the user, as well as tablet PCs, smart TVs, mobile phones, PDAs (personal digital assistants), media players, microservers, GPS (global positioning system) devices, e-book readers, digital broadcasting terminals, navigation systems, kiosks, MP3 players, digital cameras, home appliances, and other mobile or non-mobile computing devices. Furthermore, user terminals 200 may be wearable devices such as watches, glasses, headbands, and rings equipped with communication and data processing functions. Such user terminals 200 are not limited to those described 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 encompass wired networks such as LAN (local area network), WAN (wide area network), MAN (metropolitan area network), and ISDN (integrated service digital network), as well as wireless networks such as WLAN (wireless LAN), CDMA (code-division multiple access), and satellite communications, but the scope of the present invention is not limited thereto. Furthermore, the network 300 can send and receive information using short-range and / or long-range communication. Here, short-range communication can include Bluetooth, RFID (radio frequency identification), IrDA (infrared data association), UWB (ultra-wideband), ZigBee, and Wi-Fi technologies, while long-range communication can 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 to network elements such as hubs, bridges, routers, and switches. Network 300 may include one or more connected networks, such as multiple network environments, including public networks such as the Internet and private networks such as secure corporate private networks. Access to Network 300 may be provided via one or more wired or wireless access networks.

[0098] Furthermore, Network 300 can support CAN (controller area network) communication, V2I (vehicle-to-infrastructure) communication, V2X (vehicle-to-everything) communication, wave (wireless access in a vehicular environment) communication technologies, as well as IoT (Internet of Things) networks and / or 5G communication that exchange and process information between distributed components such as objects.

[0099] Figure 2 is a block diagram illustrating the configuration of a testing device for evaluating cognitive decline according to this embodiment. In the following description, parts that overlap with the description of Figure 1 will be omitted. Referring to Figure 2, the testing device 100 may include a communication unit 110, a storage medium 120, a program storage unit 130, a database 140, a testing management unit 150, and a control unit 160.

[0100] The communication unit 110 can provide a communication interface necessary to provide transmission and reception signals between the inspection device 100 and the user terminal 200 in the form of packet data, in conjunction with the network 300. Furthermore, the communication unit 110 can transmit request information from the inspection management unit 150 to the user terminal 200 and receive response information from the user terminal 200. Here, the communication network is a medium that connects 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 send and receive information after connecting to the inspection device 100. In addition, the communication unit 110 may be a device that includes hardware and software necessary to send and receive signals such as control signals or data signals via wired or wireless connections with other network devices.

[0101] The storage medium 120 performs the function of temporarily or permanently storing data processed by the control unit 160. Here, the storage medium 120 may include magnetic storage media or flash storage media, but the scope of the present invention is not limited thereto. Such a storage medium 120 may include internal memory and / or external memory, and may include volatile memory such as DRAM, SRAM, or SDRAM, non-volatile memory such as OTPROM (one-time programmable ROM), PROM, EPROM, EEPROM, maskROM, flashROM, NAND flash memory, or NOR flash memory, flash drives such as SSDs, CF (compact flash) cards, SD cards, Micro-SD cards, Mini-SD cards, Xd cards, or memory sticks, or storage devices such as HDDs.

[0102] The program memory unit 130 is equipped with control software that performs tasks such as: executing an examination process to examine how well the user performs the missions presented for each of multiple examination items and calculating the examination score for each of the multiple examination items; executing a category classification process to classify at least one of the multiple examination items into one of the multiple neurocognitive categories; and executing an evaluation process to assess whether or not there is cognitive decline in the neurocognitive category based on the examination scores for the examination items classified into the neurocognitive category.

[0103] 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 for evaluating Alzheimer's disease dementia, information on the process for evaluating frontotemporal dementia, and information on the processes for evaluating Parkinson's disease dementia and Lewy body dementia.

[0104] Furthermore, the management database can store the correct answers corresponding to the instructions described later. For example, the management database can store the correct text corresponding to the first instruction, the correct word or picture corresponding to the second-first instruction, the correct word or picture corresponding to the second-second instruction, the correct answer corresponding to the third instruction, the correct answers corresponding to the fourth-first and fourth-second instructions, the correct answers corresponding to the fifth-first and fifth-second instructions, the correct answer corresponding to the sixth instruction, the correct answers corresponding to the seventh-first and seventh-second instructions, the correct answers corresponding to the eighth-first and eighth-second instructions, the correct answer corresponding to the ninth instruction, and the correct answer corresponding to the tenth instruction.

[0105] Furthermore, the management database can store a method for calculating the test score. In this embodiment, the system can compare a series of inputs received from the user terminal 200 in response to an instruction with the correct answers, and calculate the test score by 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 will be, and the fewer incorrect answers there will be, the higher the test score will be.

[0106] In this embodiment, the number of test points can be changed based on the count result of the required time, which will be described later. For example, if the count result of the required time exceeds the time limit, the number of test points can be further reduced.

[0107] Furthermore, the management database can store reference scores for evaluating cognitive decline. The process for calculating these reference scores can be described as follows:

[0108] In the first step, the 1st to 10th test processes can be performed on the normal group. Here, the normal group is a group of healthy individuals without cognitive impairment, and can be classified differently based on gender, education level, and age. As a result of performing the 1st to 10th test processes on the normal group, the 1st to 10th test scores for the normal group can be calculated.

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

[0110] In the third process, at least one of the 1st to 10th test items for the normal group can be classified into one of the 1st to 5th neurocognitive categories. For example, the 2nd and 4th test items for the normal group can be classified into the 1st neurocognitive category, the 6th and 9th test items for the normal group can be classified into the 2nd neurocognitive category, the 8th test item for the normal group can be classified into the 3rd neurocognitive category, the 10th test item for the normal group can be classified into the 4th neurocognitive category, and the 1st, 3rd, 5th, and 7th test items for the normal group can be classified into the 5th neurocognitive category.

[0111] In the fourth step, the first to tenth Z-scores can be calculated using the first to tenth mean 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 shows how far the test scores are from the mean value when viewed in terms of standard deviation.

[0112] In this embodiment, if the Z-score is less than or equal to the first standard deviation (e.g., -1.5 SD), it can be assessed that there is cognitive impairment in the neurocognitive category to which the test item belongs. Thus, the baseline score can be said to be the test score of the normal group, where the Z-score is less than or equal to the first standard deviation (e.g., -1.5 SD). In this embodiment, the baseline score can include the first to tenth baseline scores. In this embodiment, the Z-score can also include the first to tenth Z-scores.

[0113] In an optional embodiment, the reference score can be expressed as a standard cutoff score. Here, the standard cutoff score can be said to be the test score for the normal group where the Z-score described above is the first standard deviation (e.g., -1.5SD). In this embodiment, the standard cutoff score may include the cutoff scores for the first to tenth standards.

[0114] In this embodiment, the baseline score can be updated periodically. The baseline score can be updated in real time each time a user runs a test application for assessing cognitive decline via the user terminal 200, or accesses a test site for assessing cognitive decline, in order to perform a test to evaluate cognitive decline.

[0115] Traditionally, calculating the baseline score required a large number of people to take tests and collect the results, which was time-consuming and required many personnel. Furthermore, even when new results were generated, it took a long time for them to be reflected in the baseline score.

[0116] On the other hand, in this embodiment, the test results collected in real time are stored in the database 140, and the baseline score is updated immediately, so the latest baseline score can always be maintained. Through this real-time updating of the baseline score, it is possible to help the user diagnose their cognitive state based on an accurate baseline score at all times. In addition, since the test process is conducted online, it is possible to assist in diagnosis based on the latest baseline score without the constraints of test location and time.

[0117] Furthermore, database 140 may include a user database that stores information about users who receive testing services to assess cognitive decline. Here, user information may include unique information about the user, such as the user's name, affiliation, personal details, gender, age, educational background, contact information, email address, address, and image; information about user authentication (login), such as ID (or email address) and password; and information about connection, such as the country of connection, location of connection, device used for connection, and connected network environment.

[0118] Furthermore, the user database can store user information, information provided by users who accessed the cognitive impairment assessment application or assessment site, and / or category history, user-configured environment settings, user resource usage information, and billing and payment information corresponding to the user's resource usage.

[0119] The inspection management unit 150 can execute an inspection process that inspects how well a user performs the missions presented for each of multiple inspection items, and calculates the inspection score for each of the multiple inspection items.

[0120] The testing management unit 150 can perform a category classification process after the completion of the testing process, classifying at least one of the multiple testing items into one of the multiple neurocognitive categories.

[0121] After the category classification process is completed, the examination management unit 150 can perform an evaluation process to assess 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] The inspection management unit 150 can transmit the evaluation results to the user terminal 200 and / or the terminal (not shown) of the healthcare provider (e.g., a physician) after the evaluation process has been completed.

[0123] The control unit 160, acting as a kind of central processing unit, can control the operation of the entire inspection device 100 using control software installed in the program storage unit 130. The control unit 160 can include any kind of device capable of processing data, such as a processor. Here, "processor" can mean a data processing device embedded in hardware, for example, having a physically structured circuit to execute a function represented by code or instructions contained in a program. Examples of such data processing devices embedded in hardware include microprocessors, central processing units (CPUs), processor cores, multiprocessors, ASICs (application-specific integrated circuits), FPGAs (field programmable gate arrays), etc., but the scope of the present invention is not limited thereto.

[0124] Figure 3 is a block diagram illustrating the configuration of the test management unit of the testing device for evaluating cognitive decline shown in Figure 2, and Figures 4 to 15 are illustrative diagrams of screens provided to a user terminal for conducting the test for evaluating cognitive decline according to this embodiment. In the following description, parts that overlap with the descriptions of Figures 1 and 2 will be omitted. Referring to Figures 3 to 15, the test management unit 150 according to this embodiment may include a supply unit 151, a first processing unit 152, a second processing unit 153, a third processing unit 154, and a transmission unit 155.

[0125] The information provision unit 151 can provide various information for testing to a user terminal 200 that has accessed a testing application and / or a testing site for evaluating cognitive decline. The diagrams shown below in Figures 4 to 15 can be described as screens output to the user terminal 200 by the processing of the information provision unit 151.

[0126] Figure 4 is an illustrative diagram of the first screen that the provisioning unit 151 provides to the user terminal 200 for conducting tests to evaluate cognitive decline. Referring to Figure 4, the first screen can include icons and text representing the tests. In one embodiment, the provisioning unit 151 can 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 for the First Test Process and can be provided simply and clearly, taking into consideration the elderly. In this manner, the provisioning unit 151 can provide the user terminal 200 with icons and text representing the Second Test to the Tenth Test Process for the Second Test 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 provisioning unit 151. In particular, the series of data provided by the first processing unit 152 is actually provided by the provisioning unit 151, but for the sake of explanation, it will be assumed that the first processing unit 152 provides it.

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

[0129] The first processing unit 152 can provide the user terminal 200 with a first instruction sentence that instructs the user terminal 200 to utter one or more words corresponding to a predetermined presentation category within a first time limit when executing the first inspection process.

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

[0131] The first processing unit 152 can calculate a first test score by comparing the spoken text with the correct text. In this embodiment, the first test score can be calculated to be higher the more spoken texts are found to be correct relative to the total number of times the first test process is performed.

[0132] In this embodiment, before executing the first inspection process, the first processing unit 152 provides the user terminal 200 with one or more of the methods for executing the first inspection process from among text and explanatory display screens, and allows the user to perform a practice test for the first inspection process.

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

[0134] Figures 5A to 5H are illustrative diagrams of screens provided to the user terminal 200 for executing the first inspection process. In this embodiment, Figures 5A to 5H are illustrative diagrams of screens illustrating the first inspection process.

[0135] Figure 5A shows the start screen for the first inspection process. When input is received from the start button 501, the screen can be switched to the next screen.

[0136] Figure 5B shows a screen that provides text instructions on how to perform the first test process and indicates the start of the practice test process (first practice test process) for the first test process. When the practice start button 502 is pressed, the screen can be switched to the next screen.

[0137] Figure 5C shows the screen for executing the first practice test process. After confirming the first practice instruction, the user can press the microphone button 503 and speak words while looking at 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 task.

[0138] Figure 5D shows a screen that notifies the user to rerun the first practice test process. The first practice test process can be rerun if the user did not press the microphone button 503, if the number of words spoken was less than the predetermined number (e.g., 3), or if the speaking volume was too low.

[0139] Figure 5E shows a screen indicating that the first practice test process has been completed and the main test is ready to run.

[0140] Figure 5F shows the screen indicating the start of the first instruction and the first inspection process. When the start button 505 is pressed, the screen can be switched to the next screen.

[0141] Figure 5G shows the screen for executing the first testing process. After confirming the first instruction, the user can press the microphone button 506 and speak words corresponding to the first instruction while looking at the Proglass bar 507.

[0142] Returning to Figure 3, the first processing unit 152 can execute a second inspection process, which includes 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 statement that presents multiple words or multiple pictures and instructs the user to select a word or picture from among the multiple words or multiple pictures that corresponds to a predetermined category of clue.

[0144] The first processing unit 152 can receive the selection result of a word or picture selected from among multiple presented words or pictures in response to the second-first instruction sentence from the user terminal 200.

[0145] The first processing unit 152 can calculate a 2-1 test score by comparing the selected word or picture with the correct word or image. In this embodiment, the 2-1 test score can be calculated to be higher the more correct word selection results are found relative to the total number of times the 2-1 process is executed.

[0146] In this embodiment, the first processing unit 152 can provide the user terminal 200 with one or more text and explanatory display screens showing how to execute the second-first inspection process before executing the second-first inspection process.

[0147] The first processing unit 152 can execute the second-second inspection process after the execution of the second-first inspection process is completed and a predetermined time has elapsed.

[0148] When executing the second-second inspection process, the first processing unit 152 can provide the user terminal 200 with a second-second instruction statement that prompts the user to select whether a default presented word or picture is a word seen in a previous inspection.

[0149] The first processing unit 152 can calculate the 2-2 test score by comparing the result of selecting whether a predetermined presented word or picture corresponds to the 2-2 instruction sentence is the same word or picture seen in the previous test with the correct word or picture. In this embodiment, the 2-2 test score can be calculated to be higher the more correct selection results are found relative to the total number of times the 2-2 process is executed.

[0150] In this embodiment, the first processing unit 152 can provide the user terminal 200 with one or more text and explanatory display screens showing how to execute the second-second inspection process before executing the second-second inspection process.

[0151] In an optional embodiment, the first processing unit 152 can calculate the second test score by summing one or more of the 2-1 test scores and the 2-2 test scores. Alternatively, the first processing unit 152 can use the 2-1 test score and the 2-2 test score individually when evaluating cognitive decline, without summing them. In this embodiment, if the second test score is higher than the cutoff score of the second criterion, verbal memory can be evaluated as good, and if the second test score is lower than the cutoff score of the second criterion, verbal memory can be evaluated as declined.

[0152] Figures 6A to 6H are illustrative diagrams of screens provided to the user terminal 200 for executing the second inspection process. Figures 6A to 6D are illustrative diagrams of screens illustrating the second-first inspection process, and Figures 6E to 6H are illustrative diagrams of screens illustrating the second-second inspection process. For the sake of explanation, the second inspection process according to this embodiment is described using words or pictures as examples, and pictures may be included instead of words.

[0153] Figure 6A shows the start screen of the 2-1 inspection process. When input is received from the start button 601, the screen can be switched to the next screen.

[0154] Figure 6B shows a screen that provides text instructions on how to perform the 2-1 inspection process and indicates 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] Figure 6C shows a screen where part of the 2-1 testing process is performed. After reviewing the 2-1 instructions, the user can select one of several presented words while looking at the Proglass bar 603.

[0156] Figure 6D shows a screen indicating that the execution of the 2-1 inspection process has been completed and that the next inspection process is about to begin.

[0157] Figure 6E shows the start screen for the 2-2 inspection process. When input from the start button 606 is received, the screen can be switched to the next screen. Here, the start screen for the 2-2 inspection processor can be provided to the user terminal 200 after the execution of the 7th inspection process is completed.

[0158] Figure 6F shows a screen that provides text instructions on how to perform the 2-2 inspection process and indicates 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] Figure 6G shows the screen for executing the 2-2 inspection process. After reviewing the 2-2 instructions, the user can select either the "Yes" button 605 or the "No" button 606 while looking at the Proglass bar 612.

[0160] Figure 6H shows a screen indicating that the execution of the 2-2 inspection process has been completed and that the next inspection process is about to begin.

[0161] Returning to Figure 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, excluding the practice inspection, multiple times.

[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 message that prompts the user to select an arbitrary number that matches the same image as the arbitrary symbol image within the third time limit.

[0163] The first processing unit 152 receives selection results from the user terminal 200 for arbitrary numbers that match the same image as an arbitrary symbol image in response to the third instruction, and can calculate a third test score by comparing the selected results with the correct answers. In this embodiment, the third test score can be calculated to be higher the more selection results that are found to be correct.

[0164] In this embodiment, before executing the third inspection process, the first processing unit 152 provides the user terminal 200 with instructions on how to execute the third inspection process using one or more text and explanatory display screens, and allows the user to perform a practice test for the third inspection process.

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

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

[0167] Figure 7A shows the start screen for the fifth inspection process. When input is received from the start button 701, the screen switches to the next screen, and an explanatory display screen can be shown.

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

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

[0170] Figure 7F shows the screen for performing the third practice test process. The screen in Figure 7F may include the third practice instruction, a symbol image displayed in the center of the screen, multiple symbol images displayed at the bottom of the screen, and multiple numbers that match each of the multiple symbol images. After reviewing the third practice instruction, the user can find the symbol image that is most similar to the symbol image displayed in the center of the screen and select the number that matches the found symbol image.

[0171] In Figure 7F, the symbol image displayed in the center of the screen and the multiple symbol images displayed at the bottom of the screen do not need to respond to touch. In Figure 7F, the multiple numbers matched to each of the multiple symbol images can respond to touch.

[0172] Figure 7G shows the screen displayed when a practice answer is incorrect, and Figure 7H shows the screen displayed when consecutive practice answers are incorrect. In Figures 7G and 7H, instructions can be displayed prompting the user to re-select the number corresponding to the symbol image.

[0173] Figure 7I shows the countdown to the completion of the third practice test process and the start of the third test process. In Figure 7I, a screen displaying 3, 2, 1, and start can be shown before the start of the third test process.

[0174] Figure 7J shows the execution screen for the third inspection process. The screen in Figure 7J may include the third instruction statement, a symbol image displayed in the center of the screen, multiple symbol images displayed at the bottom of the screen, and multiple numbers that match each of the multiple symbol images. After confirming the third instruction statement, the user can search for the symbol image that is most similar to the symbol image displayed in the center of the screen and select the number that matches the found symbol image. In Figure 7J, the time elapsed until the user selects a number can be counted by the ProGlass bar 705.

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

[0176] Returning to Figure 3, the first processing unit 152 can execute a fourth inspection process, including the 4-1 and 4-2 inspection processes. 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 statement that displays a default first presentation image and prompts the user to select whether 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 receives the result of selecting whether the number of colors in the predetermined first presented image is equal to or greater than a predetermined number in response to the fourth-first instruction statement from the user terminal 200, and can calculate the fourth-first inspection score by comparing the selected result with the correct answer. In this embodiment, the fourth-first inspection score can be calculated to be higher the more selection results that are found to be correct relative to the total number of times the fourth-first inspection process has been executed.

[0179] In this embodiment, the first processing unit 152 can provide the user terminal 200 with one or more text and explanatory display screens showing how to perform the 4-1 inspection process before executing 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 provide the user terminal 200 with a 4-2 instruction statement that shows a default second presentation image and prompts the user to select whether the default second presentation image is the same as the previously shown default first presentation image.

[0182] The first processing unit 152 receives the result of selecting whether the default second image is the same as the previously shown default first presentation image in response to the instruction in 4-2 from the user terminal 200, and can compare the selection result with the correct answer.

[0183] The first processing unit 152 can count a first required time from the time the instruction statement 4-2 is provided until the time when it is selected whether or not the default second image is the same as the default first presented image shown earlier.

[0184] The first processing unit 152 can calculate the 4-2 test score by reflecting the comparison results and the result of counting the first required time. In this embodiment, the 4-2 test score can be calculated differently depending on the total number of times the 4-2 test process is executed, the number of selection results found to be correct, and the result of counting the first required time. Even if there are many selection results found to be correct relative to the total number of times the 4-2 test process is executed, the 4-2 test score can be low if the result of counting the first required time is large. Conversely, even if there are few selection results found to be correct relative to the total number of times the 4-2 test process is executed, the 4-2 test score can be high if the result of counting the first required time is small.

[0185] In this embodiment, the first processing unit 152 can provide the user terminal 200 with one or more text and explanatory display screens showing how to perform the 4-2 inspection process before executing the 4-2 inspection process.

[0186] In an optional embodiment, the first processing unit 152 can calculate the fourth test score by adding the fourth-1 test score and the fourth-2 test score. Alternatively, the first processing unit 152 can use the fourth-1 test score and the fourth-2 test score separately when evaluating cognitive decline, without adding them together. In this embodiment, if the fourth test score is higher than the cutoff score of the fourth criterion, visual perception memory can be evaluated as good, and if the fourth test score is lower than the cutoff score of the fourth criterion, visual perception memory can be evaluated as impaired.

[0187] Figures 8A to 8H are illustrative diagrams of the screens provided to the user terminal 200 for executing the fourth inspection process. Figures 8A to 8D are illustrative diagrams of the screens illustrating the fourth-first inspection process, and Figures 8E to 8H are illustrative diagrams of the screens illustrating the fourth-second inspection process.

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

[0189] Figure 8B shows a screen that provides text instructions on how to perform the 4-1 inspection process and indicates 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] Figure 8C shows the screen for executing the 4-1 inspection process. After reviewing the 4-1 instructions, the user can select either the "Yes" button 803 or the "No" button 804 depending on whether the number of colors in the first presented image is greater than or equal to a predetermined number. This may further include a ProGlass bar (not shown) that performs one or more functions from among a time limit countdown and / or a progress indicator.

[0191] Figure 8D shows a screen indicating that the execution of the 4-1 inspection process has been completed and the next inspection process is about to begin.

[0192] Figure 8E shows the start screen for the 4-2 inspection process. When input from the start button 805 is received, the screen can be switched to the next screen. Here, the start screen for 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] Figure 8F shows a screen that prompts the user to replay the first image provided during the execution of the 4-1 examination process.

[0194] Figure 8G shows the screen for executing the 4-2 inspection process. After reviewing the 4-2 instructions, the user can select either the "Yes" button 806 or the "No" button 807 depending on whether the second presented image is the same as the first presented image. This may further include a ProGlass bar (not shown) that performs one or more functions from among a time limit countdown function and a function indicating the progress of the work.

[0195] Figure 8H shows a screen indicating that the execution of the 4-2 inspection process has been completed and that the next inspection process is about to begin.

[0196] Returning to Figure 3, the first processing unit 152 can execute the fifth inspection process, which includes the 5-1 and 5-2 inspection processes. In this embodiment, the first processing unit 152 can execute the fifth inspection process, excluding the practice inspection, multiple times.

[0197] When executing the 5-1 inspection process, the first processing unit 152 can provide the user terminal 200 with a 5-1 instruction statement that presents a default suggested word and two selectable words, and instructs the user to select the same word as the default suggested word from among the two selectable words.

[0198] The first processing unit 152 receives the result of selecting the same word as the predetermined presented word from two selected words in response to the 5-1 instruction statement from the user terminal 200, and can calculate the 5-1 test score by comparing the selected result with the correct answer. In this embodiment, the 5-1 test score can be calculated to be higher the more correct selection results are found relative to the total number of times the 5-1 test process has been executed.

[0199] In this embodiment, before executing the 5-1 inspection process, the first processing unit 152 provides the user terminal 200 with one or more text and explanatory display screens showing how to execute the 5-1 inspection process, and allows the user terminal 200 to perform a practice test for the 5-1 inspection process.

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

[0201] When executing the 5-2 inspection process, the first processing unit 152 can provide the user terminal 200 with a 5-2 instruction statement that presents a default suggested word and two color selection words, and instructs the user to select a word from the two color selection words that has the same color as the default suggested word.

[0202] The first processing unit 152 receives the result of selecting a word with the same color as a predetermined presented word from two color-selection words in response to the 5-2 instruction statement from the user terminal 200, and can calculate the 5-2 test score by comparing the selected result with the correct answer. In this embodiment, the 5-2 test score can be calculated to be higher the more correct selection results are found relative to the total number of times the 5-2 test process has been executed.

[0203] In this embodiment, before executing the 5-2 inspection process, the first processing unit 152 provides the user terminal 200 with one or more text and explanatory display screens showing how to execute the 5-2 inspection process, and allows the user to perform a practice test for the 5-2 inspection process.

[0204] In an optional embodiment, the first processing unit 152 can calculate the fifth test score by adding the fifth-1 test score and the fifth-2 test score. Alternatively, the first processing unit 152 can use the fifth-1 test score and the fifth-2 test score separately when evaluating cognitive decline, without adding them together. In this embodiment, if the fifth test score is higher than the cutoff score of the fifth criterion, the inhibitory function can be evaluated as good, and if the fifth test score is lower than the cutoff score of the fifth criterion, the inhibitory function can be evaluated as decreased. Figures 9A to 9O are illustrative diagrams of screens provided to the user terminal 200 for executing the fifth test process. Figures 9A to 9I are illustrative diagrams of screens explaining the fifth-1 test process, and Figures 9J to 9O are illustrative diagrams of screens explaining the fifth-2 test process.

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

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

[0207] Figure 9C shows the screen for executing the 5-1 practice test process. After reviewing the 5-1 practice instruction, the user can select the same word as the presented word from the first choice word 903 and the second choice word 904. This may further include a progress bar (not shown) that performs one or more functions of counting the time limit and indicating the progress of the task.

[0208] Figure 9D shows the screen indicating that the first choice word 905 selected from Figure 9C is correct. Here, the first choice word 905 is the same as the first choice word 903 in Figure 9C.

[0209] Figure 9E shows a screen indicating that the 5-1 practice test process can be rerun. If the result of the 5-1 practice test process is incorrect, the 5-1 practice test process can be rerun.

[0210] Figure 9F shows the screen indicating that the 5-1 practice test process has been completed and the main test is ready to run.

[0211] Figure 9G shows the screen for executing the 5-1 inspection process. After reviewing the 5-1 instructions, the user can select the same word as the presented word from the first choice word 907 and second choice word 908 while looking at the Proglass bar 906.

[0212] Figure 9H shows the screen indicating that the first choice word 909 selected from Figure 9G is correct. Here, the first choice word 909 is the same as the first choice word 907 in Figure 9G.

[0213] Figure 9I shows a screen indicating that the execution of the 5-1 inspection process has been completed and that the next inspection process is about to begin.

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

[0215] Figure 9K provides text instructions on how to perform the 5-2 test process and shows a screen that signals the start of the practice test process for the 5-2 test process (5-2 practice test process). When the practice start button 910 is pressed, the screen can be switched to the next screen.

[0216] Figure 9L shows the screen for executing the 5-2 practice test process. After reviewing the 5-2 practice instructions, the user can select a word from the first choice word 911 and second choice word 912 that has the same color as the presented word. This may further include a progress bar (not shown) that performs one or more functions of counting the time limit and indicating the progress of the task. Figure 9L shows an example where the user has selected the second choice word 912.

[0217] Figure 9M shows a screen indicating that the 5-2 practice test process has been completed and that the main test is ready to run.

[0218] Figure 9N shows the screen for performing the 5-2 test process. After reviewing the 5-2 instructions, the user can select a word from the first choice word 914 and second choice word 915 that has the same color as the presented word while looking at the Proglass bar 913. Figure 9N shows an example where the user has selected the second choice word 915.

[0219] Figure 9O shows a screen indicating that the execution of the 5-2 inspection process has been completed and that the next inspection process is about to begin.

[0220] Returning to Figure 3, the first processing unit 152 can execute the sixth inspection process. In this embodiment, the first processing unit 152 can execute the sixth inspection process, excluding the practice inspection, multiple times.

[0221] The first processing unit 152 can provide a default face presentation image expressing an emotion and a plurality of buttons for selecting an emotional state when performing the sixth examination process. The first processing unit 152 can provide the user terminal 200 with a sixth instruction message that instructs the user to select one of the plurality of buttons to represent the emotional state shown in the default face presentation image. Here, the plurality of emotion buttons may include joy buttons, surprise buttons, sadness buttons, fear buttons, anger buttons, and neutral expression buttons.

[0222] The first processing unit 152 receives the result of the user terminal 200 selecting one of several buttons to represent the emotional state shown in a predetermined face image in response to the sixth instruction, compares the selected result with the correct answer, and calculates the sixth test score. In this embodiment, the sixth test score can be calculated to be higher the more correct selection results are found relative to the total number of times the sixth test process has been executed.

[0223] In this embodiment, the first processing unit 152 provides the user terminal 200 with instructions on how to perform the sixth inspection process in text before executing the sixth inspection process, and allows the user terminal 200 to perform a practice test for the sixth inspection process.

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

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

[0226] Figure 10A shows the start screen for the sixth inspection process. When input is received from the start button 1001, the screen can be switched to the next screen.

[0227] Figure 10B shows a screen that provides text instructions on how to perform the sixth test process and indicates the start of the practice test process for the sixth test process (sixth practice test process). When the practice start button 1002 is pressed, the screen can be switched to the next screen.

[0228] Figure 10C shows the screen for executing the sixth practice test process. After the user confirms the instructions for the sixth practice test, they can select one of several assessment buttons 1003-1008 to determine what emotional state is represented in the facial image. This also includes a program bar (not shown) that performs one or more functions, such as counting down the time limit and illustrating the progress of the task.

[0229] Figure 10D shows the results screen of the sixth inspection process. As an example, it illustrates a case where the sadness button 1005 was selected from among several buttons 1003 to 1008.

[0230] Figure 10E shows the screen indicating that the sixth practice test process has been completed and the main test is ready to run.

[0231] Figure 10F shows one embodiment of the screen used to execute the sixth inspection process. After confirming the sixth instruction, the user can select one of several buttons 1003 to 1008 to represent the emotional state shown in the facial image while looking at the Proglass bar 1009. Once the user has completed selecting one of the buttons 1003 to 1008, or the time limit countdown has ended, the screen can be switched to the next screen. At this point, the time count result value obtained until one of the buttons 1003 to 1008 is selected can be output to the first processing unit 152.

[0232] Figure 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 Figure 3, the first processing unit 152 can execute the seventh inspection process, which includes the seventh inspection process and the seventh inspection process. In this embodiment, the first processing unit 152 can execute the seventh inspection process and the seventh inspection process, excluding the practice inspection, multiple times.

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

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

[0236] The first processing unit 152 can count the time elapsed until the correct result is obtained by selecting the numbers in descending or ascending order, and calculate the score for the 7-1 test. In other words, the time taken to complete the task without errors within the 7-1 time limit can be calculated as the 7-1 score. The shorter the time taken to complete the task without errors, the better the execution function can be evaluated. Also, if five mistakes are made within the 7-1 time limit, the 7-1 test can be considered a failure.

[0237] In this embodiment, before executing the 7-1 inspection process, the first processing unit 152 provides the user terminal 200 with instructions on how to execute the 7-1 inspection process using one or more text and explanatory display screens, and allows the user to perform a practice test 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 statement that instructs the user to alternately select any number and the day of the week corresponding to any number from the numbers and days of the week presented within the 7-2 time limit.

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

[0241] The first processing unit 152 can count the time elapsed until the correct result is obtained by selecting the numbers in descending or ascending order, and calculate the score for the 7-2 test. In other words, the score for the 7-2 test can be calculated based on the time taken to complete the task without errors within the 7-2 time limit. The shorter the time taken to complete the task without errors, the better the execution function can be evaluated. Also, if five mistakes are made within the 7-2 time limit, the 7-2 test can be considered a failure.

[0242] In this embodiment, before executing the 7-2 inspection process, the first processing unit 152 provides the user terminal 200 with instructions on how to execute the 7-2 inspection process using one or more text and explanatory display screens, and allows the user to perform a practice test for the 7-2 inspection process.

[0243] In an optional embodiment, the first processing unit 152 can calculate the seventh test score by adding the seventh-1 test score and the seventh-2 test score. Alternatively, the first processing unit 152 can use the seventh-1 test score and the seventh-2 test score separately when evaluating the execution function, without adding them together. In this embodiment, if the sum of the seventh-1 test score and the seventh-2 test score is higher than the cutoff score of the seventh criterion, the execution function can be evaluated as being better, and if the seventh test score is lower than the cutoff score of the seventh criterion, the execution function can be evaluated as being reduced.

[0244] Figures 11A to 11U are illustrative diagrams of the screens provided to the user terminal 200 for performing the 7-1 inspection process.

[0245] Figure 11A shows the start screen for the 7-1 inspection process. When input is received from the start button 1101, the screen switches to the next screen, and an explanatory display screen can be shown.

[0246] Figures 11B to 11F show explanatory display screens for the 7-1 inspection process. Figures 11B to 11D can be displayed all at once or sequentially, and the screen can proceed to the next screen after a predetermined time has elapsed. In Figure 11B, any number can be displayed on the screen. In Figure 11B, the phrase "Start" can be displayed on any one of the numbers on the screen. The phrase "End" can also be displayed on the last of the numbers. In Figures 11C to 11F, an instruction message can be output to select the number 1 labeled "Start" and then select the next numbers in ascending order. Also, in Figures 11C to 11F, when the hand image 1102 touches the numbers 1, 2, and 3 in order, the color of the numbers that have been touched may change. Furthermore, the numbers that have been touched can be displayed connected to each other by line segments.

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

[0248] Figure 11H shows the screen for executing the 7-1 practice test process. The screen in Figure 11H can display, for example, the instruction for the 7-1 practice test, which requires selecting numbers in ascending order, and any number. The phrase "Start" may be displayed for the first number to be selected among the arbitrary numbers. The phrase "End" may be displayed for the last number to be selected among the arbitrary numbers.

[0249] Figure 11I shows the screen displayed after the first incorrect practice answer, and Figure 11J shows the screen displayed after two or more consecutive incorrect practice answers. In Figures 11I and 11J, instructions prompting the user to re-select a number can be displayed.

[0250] Figure 11K shows the screen that appears when a predetermined time (e.g., 10 seconds) has elapsed without any numbers being selected. In Figure 11K, an instruction message can be displayed to select a number and start the test.

[0251] Figure 11L shows the screen that appears when a predetermined time (e.g., 20 seconds) has elapsed since the selection of one or more numbers. Figure 11L can display a message prompting the user to select the next number in the correct order.

[0252] Figure 11M shows a screen displaying instructions to select the test start button 1104 to complete the 7-1 practice test process and then proceed with the 7-1 test process.

[0253] Figure 11N shows a countdown for executing the 7-1 inspection process. In Figure 11N, a screen displaying 3, 2, 1, and Start can be shown before the start of the 7-1 inspection process.

[0254] Figures 11O and 11P show the execution screen of the 7-1 inspection process. The screens in Figures 11O and 11P can display, for example, the 7-1 instruction text which prompts the user to select numbers in ascending order, and arbitrary numbers. The phrase "Start" can be displayed for the first number to be selected among the arbitrary numbers. The phrase "End" can be displayed for the last number to be selected among the arbitrary numbers. On the screen in Figure 11P, the color of the numbers that have been touched can be changed. On the screen in Figure 11P, the numbers that have been touched can be displayed connected to each other by line segments. From Figures 11O and 11P, the user can select numbers while looking at the progress bar 1105 which counts the elapsed time.

[0255] Figure 11Q shows the screen displayed after the first incorrect answer, and Figure 11R shows the screen displayed after two or more incorrect answers. In Figures 11Q and 11R, numbers selected in the wrong order can be changed to another color (for example, red). Also, in Figures 11Q and 11R, a message prompting the user to re-select numbers can be displayed. Even when a message is displayed, the elapsed time can continue to be counted.

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

[0257] Figure 11T shows the screen that appears when a predetermined time (e.g., 20 seconds) has elapsed since selecting one or more numbers without selecting the next number. Figure 11T can output a message prompting the user to select the next number in order.

[0258] Figure 11U shows a screen indicating that the execution of the 7-1 inspection process has been completed and that the next inspection process is about to begin.

[0259] Figures 12A to 12N are illustrative diagrams of the screens provided to the user terminal 200 for performing the 7-2 inspection process.

[0260] Figure 12A shows the start screen for the 7-2 inspection process. When input is received from the start button 2101, the screen switches to the next screen, and an explanatory display screen can be shown.

[0261] Figures 12B and 12C show explanatory display screens for the 7-2 inspection process. Figures 12B and 12C can be displayed all at once or sequentially, and the screen can proceed to the next screen after a predetermined time has elapsed. In Figure 12B, any number and any day of the week can be displayed on the screen. In Figure 12B, instructions can be displayed to select numbers and days of the week alternately. The phrase "start" can be displayed on any one of the numbers. The phrase "end" can also be displayed on the last of the numbers. In Figure 12C, an instruction can be output to select the number 1, which is labeled "start," and then select the month, which is the start of the days of the week. In Figure 12C, when the hand image 1202 touches the numbers 1, Monday, 2, Tuesday, and 3 in order, the color of the touched numbers and days of the week can change. The touched numbers and days of the week can then be displayed connected to each other by line segments.

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

[0263] Figure 12E shows the screen for executing the 7-2 practice test process. The screen in Figure 12E can display, for example, the 7-2 practice instructions which require the user to alternately select numbers and days of the week, along with any number and any day of the week. The phrase "Start" may be displayed for the first number to be selected among the arbitrary numbers. The phrase "End" may be displayed for the last number or day of the week to be selected among the arbitrary numbers. The user can complete the practice test by alternately selecting numbers and days of the week while looking at the arbitrary numbers and days of the week shown in Figure 12E.

[0264] Figure 12F shows a screen displaying instructions to select the "Start Test" button 1204 to complete the 7-2 practice test process and then proceed with the 7-2 test process.

[0265] Figure 12G shows a countdown for executing the 7-2 inspection process. In Figure 12G, a screen displaying 3, 2, 1, and Start can be shown before the start of the 7-2 inspection process.

[0266] Figures 12H and 12I show the execution screen of the 7-2 inspection process. The screens in Figures 12H and 12I can display, for example, the 7-2 instruction text which prompts the user to alternately select numbers and days of the week, as well as any number and any day of the week. The phrase "Start" can be displayed for the number to be selected first among the arbitrary numbers and days of the week. The phrase "End" can be displayed for the number or day of the week to be selected last among the arbitrary numbers and days of the week. In the screen of Figure 12I, the color of the number or day of the week that has been touched can be changed. In the screen of Figure 12I, the numbers and days of the week that have been touched can be displayed connected to each other by line segments. From Figures 12H and 12I, the user can alternately select numbers and days of the week while watching the progress bar 1205 which counts the elapsed time.

[0267] Figure 12J shows the screen displayed after the first incorrect answer, and Figure 12K shows the screen displayed after two or more incorrect answers. In Figures 12J and 12K, instructions can be displayed prompting the user to re-select one or more of the numbers and days of the week. The elapsed time can continue to be counted even when instructions are displayed.

[0268] Figure 12L shows the screen that appears when a predetermined time (e.g., 10 seconds) has elapsed without any numbers being selected. In Figure 12L, an instruction message can be displayed to select a number and start the test.

[0269] Figure 12M shows the screen that appears when a predetermined time (e.g., 20 seconds) has elapsed since selecting one or more numbers or days of the week without selecting the next number or day of the week. Figure 12M can output a message prompting the user to select the next number or day of the week in the correct order.

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

[0271] Returning to Figure 3, the first processing unit 152 can execute the eighth inspection process, which includes the eighth-1 inspection process and the eighth-2 inspection process. In this embodiment, the first processing unit 152 can execute the eighth inspection process multiple times.

[0272] When executing the 8-1 inspection process, the first processing unit 152 can provide the user terminal 200 with an 8-1 instruction statement which shows a plurality of first object presentation images including the name and shape of the first object, determines the size of each first object, and causes the user to select the plurality of first object presentation images in descending or ascending order.

[0273] The first processing unit 152 receives the results of selecting the first object presentation images in descending or ascending order in response to the 8-1 instruction from the user terminal 200, and can calculate the 8-1 test score by comparing the selected results with the correct answer. In this embodiment, the 8-1 test score can be calculated to be higher the more selection results that are found to be correct relative to the total number of times the 8-1 process is executed.

[0274] In this embodiment, the first processing unit 152 can provide the user terminal 200 with instructions on how to perform the 8-1 inspection process using one or more text and explanatory display screens before executing the 8-1 inspection process.

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

[0276] When executing the inspection process of 8-2, the first processing unit 152 can provide the user terminal 200 with instructions of 8-2, which include showing a plurality of images of the second object, including the shape of the second object, and determine the weight of each of the second objects, instructing the user to select the plurality of images of the second object in descending or ascending order.

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

[0278] In the present embodiment, before executing the 8-2 test process, the first processing unit 152 can provide the execution method of the 8-2 test process to the user terminal 200 via one or more of text and an explanation display screen. In the present embodiment, the 8-2 test score can be calculated to be higher as the number of selection results determined to be correct increases relative to the total number of times the 8-2 process is executed.

[0279] As an alternative embodiment, the first processing unit 152 can sum the 8-1 test score and the 8-2 test score to calculate the 8th test score. In addition, the first processing unit 152 may not sum the 8-1 test score and the 8-2 test score, and may use each of the 8-1 test score and the 8-2 test score when evaluating cognitive function decline. In the present embodiment, when the 8th test score is higher than the 8th standard cutoff score, it can be evaluated that semantic memory ability is good, and when the 8th test score is lower than the 8th standard cutoff score, it can be evaluated that semantic memory ability has declined.

[0280] FIG. 13A to FIG. 13J are exemplary diagrams of screens provided to the user terminal 200 for executing the 8th test process. FIG. 13A to FIG. 13E are exemplary diagrams of screens for explaining the 8-1 test process, and FIG. 13F to FIG. 13J are exemplary diagrams of screens for explaining the 8-2 test process.

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

[0282] Figure 13B shows a screen that provides text instructions on how to perform the 8-1 inspection process and indicates 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] Figure 13C shows the screen for executing the 8-1 inspection process. After confirming the 8-1 instructions, the user can select multiple first object presentation images in order of size while looking at the Proglass bar 1303. If the user needs to correct their selection, they can press the input correction button 1304 to re-select. Once the user has completed their selection and pressed the confirmation button 1305, they can switch to the next screen.

[0284] Figure 13D shows the execution result screen of the 8-1 inspection process. The first object presentation image can display a number indicating the order selected by the user.

[0285] Figure 13E shows a screen indicating that the execution of the 8-1 inspection process has been completed and that the next inspection process is about to begin.

[0286] Figure 13F shows the start screen for the 8-2 inspection process.

[0287] Figure 13G provides text instructions on how to perform the 8-2 inspection process and shows a screen indicating 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] Figure 13H shows the screen for executing the 8-2 inspection process. After reviewing the 8-2 instructions, the user can select multiple images of the second object in order of weight while viewing the Proglass bar 1307. If the user needs to correct their selection, they can press the input correction button 1308 to re-select. Once the user has completed their selection and pressed the confirmation button 1309, they can switch to the next screen.

[0289] Figure 13I shows a screen indicating that the execution of the 8-2 inspection process has been completed and that the next inspection process is about to begin.

[0290] Returning to Figure 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, excluding the practice inspection, multiple times.

[0291] When executing the ninth inspection process, the first processing unit 152 can provide the user terminal 200 with a ninth instruction message that, after the narration has been provided, prompts 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 receives the selection result of the answer to the question corresponding to the ninth instruction from the user terminal 200, and can calculate the ninth test score by comparing the selected result with the correct answer. In this embodiment, the ninth test score can be calculated to be higher the more selection results that are found to be correct.

[0293] In this embodiment, before executing the ninth inspection process, the first processing unit 152 provides the user terminal 200 with instructions on how to execute the ninth inspection process using one or more text and explanatory display screens, and allows the user to perform a practice test for the ninth inspection process.

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

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

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

[0297] Figure 14B shows the explanation display screen. Figure 14B can indicate that the inspection is to listen to a short story and answer a question.

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

[0299] Figures 14D to 14F show the ninth inspection screen. Figure 14D can provide any one main image and a narration for the main image on the screen. In Figure 14E, after the provision of the narration is completed, a plurality of sub-images included in the main image and an instruction sentence for asking a question can be displayed. In Figure 14F, a plurality of sub-images, a question, and answer buttons selectable for the question (for example, a "Yes" button 1403 and a "No" button 1404) can be displayed. The user can select one of the answer buttons as an answer to the question while viewing the plurality of sub-images.

[0300] Figure 14G shows a screen notifying that the execution of the ninth inspection process is completed and the start of the next inspection process.

[0301] Returning to Figure 3, the first processing unit 152 can execute the tenth inspection process. In the present embodiment, the first processing unit 152 can execute the tenth inspection process excluding the practice inspection a plurality of times.

[0302] When performing the tenth inspection process, the first processing unit 152 can provide the user terminal 200 with a tenth instruction sentence that presents a plurality of preset presented graphics and allows a figure with a different color to be selected from the plurality of preset presented graphics.

[0303] The first processing unit 152 receives the result of selecting a shape with a different color from a plurality of predefined presented shapes in response to the 10th instruction from the user terminal 200, and can calculate the 10th test score by comparing the selected result with the correct answer. In this embodiment, the 10th test score can be calculated to be higher the more correct selection results are found relative to the total number of times the 10th test process has been executed.

[0304] In this embodiment, before executing the 10th inspection process, the first processing unit 152 provides the user terminal 200 with one or more of the methods for executing the 10th inspection process from among text and explanatory display screens, and allows the user to perform a practice test for the 10th inspection process.

[0305] In this embodiment, if the 10th test score is higher than the cutoff score of the 10th standard, the color discrimination ability can be evaluated as good, and if the 10th test score is lower than the cutoff score of the 10th standard, the color discrimination ability can be evaluated as decreased.

[0306] Figures 15A to 15J are illustrative diagrams of the screens provided to the user terminal 200 for executing the 10th inspection process.

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

[0308] Figure 15B shows a screen that provides text instructions on how to perform the 10th test process and signals the start of the practice test process (10th practice test process) for the 10th test process. When the practice start button 1502 is pressed, the screen can be switched to the next screen.

[0309] Figure 15C shows the screen for executing the 10th practice test process. After reviewing the instructions for the 10th practice test, the user can select a shape with a different color from several predefined presented shapes while looking at the Proglass bar 1503. Once the shape selection is complete, or the time limit has been reached, the user can switch to the next screen.

[0310] Figure 15D shows the execution result screen of the 10th practice test process shown in Figure 15C. If the selected shape is correct, the system can output a correct answer symbol and / or a correct answer sound effect, and if the selected shape is incorrect, the system can output an incorrect answer symbol and / or an incorrect answer sound effect.

[0311] Figure 15E shows a screen indicating that the 10th practice test process can be rerun. If the result of the 10th practice test process is incorrect, the 10th practice test process can be rerun.

[0312] Figure 15F shows the screen indicating that the 10th practice test process has been completed and the main test is ready to run.

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

[0314] Figure 15H shows the screen for performing the 10th inspection process. After reviewing the 10th instruction, the user can select a shape with a different color from several predefined presented shapes while looking at the Proglass bar 1505. Once the shape selection is complete, or the time limit has been reached, the user can switch to the next screen.

[0315] Figure 15I shows the execution result screen of the 10th inspection process shown in Figure 15H. If the selected shape is correct, the system can output a correct answer symbol and / or a correct answer sound effect. If the selected shape is incorrect, the system can output an incorrect answer symbol and / or an incorrect answer sound effect.

[0316] Figure 15J illustrates a screen indicating that the execution of the 10th inspection process has been completed and the system is waiting for the inspection results to be output.

[0317] Returning to Figure 3, once the execution of the first to tenth testing processes by the first processing unit 152 is complete, the second processing unit 153 can execute a category classification process that classifies at least one of the multiple testing items into one of the multiple neurocognitive categories.

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

[0319] Once the category classification process of the second processing unit 153 is completed, the third processing unit 154 can perform an evaluation process to assess 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 indicates the user may have mild cognitive impairment if it is evaluated that cognitive function is impaired in one or more of the first to fifth neurocognitive categories.

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

[0322] The third processing unit 154 can perform a first evaluation process to assess whether or not there is cognitive decline in the first neurocognitive category based on the second and fourth test scores.

[0323] The third processing unit 154, when executing the first evaluation process, can compare the second test score for the second test item with the second reference score and generate a first comparison result if the second test score is less than the second reference score. In this embodiment, the second test score may include the verbal cue memory test score. In this embodiment, the second reference score may include the second test score of the normal group whose second Z-score is the second standard deviation (e.g., -1.5SD).

[0324] In this embodiment, the first comparison result may include the 1-1 comparison result and the 1-2 comparison result. The 1-1 comparison result can be generated when the second test score is less than the second baseline score. From the 1-1 comparison result, it can be seen that the user's verbal memory has deteriorated. The 1-2 comparison result can be generated when the second test score is equal to or greater than the second baseline score. From the 1-2 comparison result, it can be seen that the user's verbal memory is good. In this embodiment, the first comparison result can be replaced with the 1-1 comparison result.

[0325] When executing the first evaluation process, the third processing unit 154 can compare the fourth test score for the fourth test item with the fourth reference score and generate a second comparison result if the fourth test score is less than the fourth reference score. In this embodiment, the fourth test score may include the visual diagram memory test score. In this embodiment, the fourth reference score may include the fourth test score of the normal group where the fourth Z-score is the fourth standard deviation (e.g., -1.5SD).

[0326] In this embodiment, the second comparison result may include the 2-1 comparison result and the 2-2 comparison result. The 2-1 comparison result can be generated when the 4th test score is less than the 4th reference score. From the 2-1 comparison result, it can be seen that the user's visual perception memory has decreased. The 2-2 comparison result can be generated when the 4th test score is equal to or greater than the 4th reference score. From the 2-2 comparison result, it can be seen that the user's visual perception memory is good. In this embodiment, the second comparison result can be replaced with the 2-1 comparison result.

[0327] The third processing unit 154 can evaluate whether there is a cognitive decline in the first neurocognitive category, namely memory, when one or more of the first and second comparison results are generated.

[0328] The third processing unit 154 can perform a second evaluation process to assess whether or not there is cognitive decline in the second neurocognitive category based on the sixth and eighth test scores.

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

[0330] In this embodiment, the third comparison result may include the third-first comparison result and the third-second comparison result. The third-first comparison result can be generated when the eighth test score is less than the eighth baseline score. From the third-first comparison result, it can be seen that the user's ability to perceive the intensity of emotions has decreased. The third-second comparison result can be generated when the eighth test score is equal to or greater than the eighth baseline score. From the third-second comparison result, it can be seen that the user's ability to perceive the intensity of emotions is good. In this embodiment, the third comparison result can be replaced by the third-first comparison result. In this embodiment, the third comparison result can be replaced by the third-first comparison result.

[0331] When the third processing unit 154 executes the second evaluation process, it can compare the ninth test score for the ninth test item with the ninth reference score and generate a fourth comparison result if the ninth test score is less than the fourth reference score. In this embodiment, the ninth test score may include the theory of mind test score. In this embodiment, the ninth reference score may include the ninth test score of the normal group where the ninth Z-score is the ninth standard deviation (e.g., -1.5SD).

[0332] In this embodiment, the fourth comparison result may include the 4-1 comparison result and the 4-2 comparison result. The 4-1 comparison result can 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 social situations has decreased. The 4-2 comparison result can 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 social situations is good. In this embodiment, the fourth comparison result can be replaced with the 4-1 comparison result. The third processing unit 154 can evaluate whether there is a cognitive decline in the second neurocognitive category, i.e., social cognition, when one or more of the third and fourth comparison results are generated.

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

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

[0335] In this embodiment, the fifth comparison result may include the fifth-first comparison result and the fifth-second comparison result. The fifth-first comparison result can be generated when the eighth test score is less than the eighth baseline score. From the fifth-first comparison result, it can be seen that the user's semantic memory has deteriorated. The fifth-second comparison result can be generated when the eighth test score is equal to or greater than the eighth baseline score. From the fifth-second comparison result, it can be seen that the user's semantic memory is good. In this embodiment, the fifth comparison result can be replaced with the fifth-first comparison result.

[0336] The third processing unit 154 can perform a fourth evaluation process to assess whether or not there is cognitive decline in the fourth neurocognitive category based on the tenth test score.

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

[0338] In this embodiment, the sixth comparison result may include the sixth comparison result and the sixth comparison result. The sixth comparison result can be generated when the tenth test score is less than the tenth reference score. From the sixth comparison result, it can be seen that the user's color discrimination ability has decreased. The sixth comparison result can be generated when the tenth test score is equal to or greater than the tenth reference score. From the sixth comparison result, it can be seen that the user's color discrimination ability is good. In this embodiment, the sixth comparison result can be replaced with the sixth comparison result.

[0339] The third processing unit 154 can perform a fifth evaluation process to assess whether or not there is cognitive decline in the fifth neurocognitive category based on the first test score, the third test score, the fifth test score, and the seventh test score.

[0340] When the third processing unit 154 executes the fifth evaluation process, it can compare the first test score for the first test item with the first reference score and generate the seventh comparison result if the first test score is less than the first reference score. In this embodiment, the first test score may include the fluency test score. In this embodiment, the first reference score may include the first test score of the normal group whose first Z-score is the first standard deviation (e.g., -1.5SD).

[0341] In this embodiment, the seventh comparison result may include the seventh comparison result and the seventh comparison result. The seventh comparison result can be generated when the first test score is less than the first baseline score. From the seventh comparison result, it can be seen that the user's fluency has decreased. The seventh comparison result can be generated when the first test score is equal to or greater than the first baseline score. From the seventh comparison result, it can be seen that the user's fluency is good. In this embodiment, the seventh comparison result can be replaced with the seventh comparison result.

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

[0343] In this embodiment, the eighth comparison result may include the eighth-first comparison result and the eighth-second comparison result. The eighth-first comparison result can be generated when the third test score is less than the third reference score. From the eighth-first comparison result, it can be seen that the user's inhibition function has decreased. The eighth-second comparison result can be generated when the third test score is equal to or greater than the third reference score. From the eighth-second comparison result, it can be seen that the user's inhibition function is good. In this embodiment, the eighth comparison result can be replaced with the eighth-first comparison result.

[0344] When the third processing unit 154 executes the fifth evaluation process, it can compare the fifth test score for the fifth test item with the fifth reference score and generate the ninth comparison result if the fifth test score is less than the fifth reference score. In this embodiment, the fifth test score may include the spatiotemporal attention test score. In this embodiment, the fifth reference score may include the fifth test score of the 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 the ninth comparison result and the ninth comparison result. The ninth comparison result can be generated when the fifth test score is less than the fifth baseline score. From the ninth comparison result, it can be seen that the user's attention and working memory have decreased. The ninth comparison result can be generated when the fifth test score is equal to or greater than the fifth baseline score. From the ninth comparison result, it can be seen that the user's attention and working memory are good. In this embodiment, the ninth comparison result can be replaced with the ninth comparison result.

[0346] When the third processing unit 154 executes the fifth evaluation process, it can compare the seventh test score for the seventh test item with the seventh reference score and generate a tenth comparison result if the seventh test score is less than the seventh reference score. In this embodiment, the seventh test score may include the Hayling test score. In this embodiment, the seventh reference score may include the seventh test score of the normal group where the seventh Z-score is the seventh standard deviation (e.g., -1.5SD).

[0347] In this embodiment, the 10th comparison result may include the 10-1 comparison result and the 10-2 comparison result. The 10-1 comparison result can be generated when the 7th test score is less than the 7th reference score. From the 10-1 comparison result, it can be seen that the user's verbal inhibition has decreased. The 10-2 comparison result can be generated when the 7th test score is equal to or greater than the 7th reference score. From the 10-2 comparison result, it can be seen that the user's verbal inhibition is good. In this embodiment, the 10th comparison result can be replaced with the 10-1 comparison result.

[0348] The third processing unit 154 can evaluate whether there is a cognitive impairment in the fifth neurocognitive category, namely attention execution, when one or more of the seventh, eighth, ninth, and tenth comparison results are generated.

[0349] The transmission unit 155 can transmit the identification results to the user terminal 200 and / or the healthcare provider's (e.g., physician's) terminal (not shown) after the identification process has been completed.

[0350] Figure 16 is a block diagram illustrating the configuration of a testing apparatus for evaluating cognitive decline according to another embodiment. In the following description, any parts that overlap with the descriptions of Figures 1 to 15 will be omitted. Referring to Figure 16, the testing apparatus 100 according to another embodiment may include a processor 170 and a memory 180.

[0351] In this embodiment, the processor 170 can process the functions performed by the communication unit 110, storage medium 120, program storage unit 130, database 140, inspection management unit 150, and control unit 160 disclosed in Figures 2 and 3.

[0352] Such a processor 170 can control the operation of the entire inspection device 100. Here, "processor" can mean a hardware-integrated data processing device that has physically structured circuitry to execute functions represented by code or instructions contained in a program. Examples of such hardware-integrated data processing devices include microprocessors, central processing units, processor cores, multiprocessors, ASICs, FPGAs, etc., but the scope of the present invention is not limited thereto.

[0353] Memory 180 is operablely connected to processor 170 and can store at least one code related to an operation performed by processor 170.

[0354] Furthermore, the memory 180 can perform the function of temporarily or permanently storing data processed by the processor 170, and may include data built into 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 a memory 180 may include internal memory and / or external memory, and may include volatile memory such as DRAM, SRAM, or SDRAM, non-volatile memory such as OTPROM, PROM, EPROM, EEPROM, mask ROM, flash ROM, NAND flash memory, or NOR flash memory, and storage devices such as flash drives such as SSDs, CF cards, SD cards, Micro-SD cards, Mini-SD cards, xD cards, or Memory Sticks, or HDDs.

[0355] Figures 17 to 20 are flowcharts illustrating the testing method for evaluating cognitive decline according to this embodiment. In the following description, any parts that overlap with the descriptions of Figures 1 to 16 will be omitted. The testing method for evaluating cognitive decline according to this embodiment will be described assuming that the testing device 100 is executed by the processor 170 with the assistance of peripheral components.

[0356] Referring to Figure 17, in step S1710, the processor 170 can inspect how well the user performs the missions presented for each of the multiple inspection items and calculate the inspection score for each of the multiple inspection items. In this embodiment, step S1710 can be expressed as an inspection step in the claims described later.

[0357] Figure 18 shows a detailed flowchart of the testing steps. Referring to Figure 18, in step S1710-1, the processor 170 can perform a first testing step in which it tests the user on a first testing item that evaluates how well they can utter words corresponding to a predetermined presented category within a time limit, and calculates a first testing score.

[0358] In step S1710-2, after the execution of the first test step is completed, the processor 170 may perform a second test step, which involves providing cues for a predetermined category to learn a word or picture, performing a test on a second test item to evaluate how well the learned word or picture is remembered after a predetermined time has elapsed, and calculating a second test score.

[0359] In step S1710-3, after the execution of the second inspection step is completed, the processor 170 may perform a third inspection step in which it performs an inspection on a third inspection item that evaluates how accurately and quickly the user can select any number that matches the presented symbol image within a predetermined time limit by looking at the presented symbol image, and calculates a third inspection score.

[0360] In step S1710-4, after the execution of the third test step is completed, the processor 170 can perform a fourth test step which involves learning a predetermined presentation image, performing a test on a fourth test item that evaluates how well the learned presentation image is remembered after a predetermined time has elapsed, and calculating a fourth test score.

[0361] In step S1710-5, after the execution of the fourth test step is completed, the processor 170 may perform a fifth test step, which involves performing a test on a fifth test item that evaluates whether the user accurately pronounces a predetermined presented word and the color of the predetermined presented word, and calculating a fifth test score.

[0362] In step S1710-6, after the execution of the fifth test step is completed, the processor 170 may perform a sixth test step, which involves performing a test on a sixth test item that evaluates whether the emotional state appearing in a predetermined face presentation image is understood, and calculating a sixth test score.

[0363] In step S1710-7, after the execution of the sixth inspection step is completed, the processor 170 can perform a seventh inspection step which evaluates how accurately and quickly the present numbers are selected within a predetermined time limit, and how accurately and quickly the present numbers and days of the week are selected, and calculates the seventh inspection score.

[0364] In step S1710-8, after the execution of the seventh inspection step is completed, the processor 170 may perform an inspection of the eighth inspection item, which evaluates whether the predetermined sizes and weights of the presented objects are arranged in descending or ascending order, and calculate the eighth inspection score.

[0365] In step S1710-9, after the execution of the eighth test step is completed, the processor 170 may perform a ninth test step, which involves providing an arbitrary image and a narration for the arbitrary image, performing a test on a ninth test item that evaluates the degree of understanding of social situations based on the results of collecting the number of correct responses to questions after the provision of the narration is completed, and calculating a score for the ninth test.

[0366] In step S1710-10, after the execution of the ninth inspection step is completed, the processor 170 may perform a tenth inspection step which involves performing an inspection on a tenth inspection item that evaluates whether it can find a figure of a different color from the color of a predetermined presented figure, and calculating the tenth inspection score.

[0367] Returning to Figure 17, in step S1720, after the execution of the test step is complete, the processor 170 can classify at least one of the multiple test items into one of the multiple neurocognitive categories. In this embodiment, step S1720 can be expressed as a category classification step in the claims described later.

[0368] Figure 19 shows a detailed flowchart of the category classification step. Referring to Figure 19, in step S1720-1, the processor 170 can classify the second and fourth test items into a first neurocognitive category in which cognitive impairment with respect to memory can be assessed.

[0369] In step S1720-2, the processor 170 can classify the 6th and 9th test items into a second neurocognitive category that can assess cognitive decline in relation to social cognition.

[0370] In step S1720-3, the processor 170 can classify the eighth test item into the third neurocognitive category, which can assess cognitive impairment in language.

[0371] In step S1720-4, the processor 170 can classify the 10th test item into a fourth neurocognitive category that can assess cognitive impairment in perception.

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

[0373] Returning to Figure 17, in step S1730, after the execution of the category classification step is complete, the processor 170 can evaluate whether 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, step S1730 can be expressed as the evaluation step in the claims described later.

[0374] Figure 20 shows a detailed flowchart of the evaluation steps. Referring to Figure 20, in step S1730-1, the processor 170 can execute the first evaluation process. When executing the first evaluation process, the processor 170 can compare the second test score for the second test item with the second baseline score and generate a first comparison result if the second test score is less than the second baseline score. When executing the first evaluation process, the processor 170 can compare the fourth test score for the fourth test item with the third baseline score and generate a second comparison result if the fourth test score is less than the fourth baseline score. When one or more of the first and second comparison results are generated, the processor 170 can evaluate whether there is a cognitive decline in the first neurocognitive category, namely memory.

[0375] When evaluating cognitive decline in memory, using only the second and / or fourth test item out of the first to ten test items allows for the calculation of evaluation results using fewer computer resources and at a higher processing speed compared to performing all ten test items, thereby improving the accuracy and reliability of the cognitive decline assessment.

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

[0377] The processor 170 can assess whether there is a cognitive decline in the second neurocognitive category, namely social cognition, if one or more of the third and fourth comparison results are generated.

[0378] When assessing cognitive decline in social cognition, using only the 6th and / or 9th test item out of the 10 test items allows for the calculation of assessment results using fewer computer resources and at a higher processing speed compared to performing all 10 test items, thereby improving the accuracy and reliability of the cognitive decline assessment.

[0379] In step S1730-3, the processor 170 can execute the third evaluation process. When executing the third evaluation process, the processor 170 compares the score for the eighth test item with the eighth baseline score and can generate a fifth comparison result if the score for the eighth test item is less than the eighth baseline score. The generation of the fifth result allows the processor 170 to assess that there is a cognitive impairment in the third neurocognitive category, namely language.

[0380] When evaluating cognitive decline in language, using only the eighth test item out of the ten test items allows for the calculation of evaluation results using fewer computer resources and at a higher processing speed compared to performing all ten test items, thereby improving the accuracy and reliability of the cognitive decline assessment.

[0381] In step S1730-4, the processor 170 can perform the fourth evaluation process. When performing the fourth evaluation process, the processor 170 compares the score for the fifth test item with the tenth reference score and can generate the sixth comparison result if the score for the fifth test item is less than the tenth reference score. By generating the sixth comparison result, the processor 170 can assess that there is a cognitive impairment in the fourth neurocognitive category, namely perception.

[0382] When evaluating cognitive impairment in perception, using only the 10th test item out of the 10 test items allows for the calculation of evaluation results using fewer computer resources and at a higher processing speed compared to performing all 10 test items, thereby improving the accuracy and reliability of the cognitive impairment assessment.

[0383] In step S1730-5, the processor 170 can execute the fifth evaluation process. When executing the fifth evaluation process, the processor 170 can compare the first test score for the first test item with the first baseline score and generate the seventh comparison result if the first test score is less than the first baseline score. When executing the fifth evaluation process, the processor 170 can compare the third test score for the third test item with the third baseline score and generate the eighth comparison result if the third test score is less than the third baseline score. When executing the fifth evaluation process, the processor 170 can compare the fifth test score for the fifth test item with the fifth baseline score and generate the ninth comparison result if the fifth test score is less than the fifth baseline score. When executing the fifth evaluation process, the processor 170 can compare the seventh test score for the seventh test item with the seventh baseline score and generate the tenth comparison result if the seventh test score is less than the seventh baseline score. The processor 170 can assess whether there is cognitive impairment in the fifth neurocognitive category, namely attention execution, by generating one or more of the seventh, eighth, ninth, and tenth comparison results.

[0384] When evaluating cognitive impairment in attention execution, using only the first, third, fifth, and / or seventh test items from the first to tenth test items allows for the calculation of evaluation results using fewer computer resources and at a higher processing speed compared to performing all ten test items, thereby improving the accuracy and reliability of the cognitive impairment assessment.

[0385] The embodiments of the present invention described above can be implemented in the form of a computer program that can be executed on a computer via various components, and such a computer program can be recorded on a computer-readable medium. In this case, the medium 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 ROM, RAM, and flash memory.

[0386] On the other hand, the computer program may be specifically designed and configured for the present invention, or it may be publicly known and available to those skilled in the field of computer software. Examples of computer programs may 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 or the like.

[0387] In the specification of this invention (particularly in the claims), the use of the term "the foregoing" and similar directive terms may be singular or plural. Furthermore, where a range is described in this invention, it is equivalent to describing each individual value constituting the range in the detailed description of the invention (unless otherwise stated) to include inventions to which the individual values ​​belonging to the said range are applied.

[0388] Unless otherwise stated, the steps constituting the method according to the present invention may be performed in any order. The present invention is not necessarily limited to the order in which the steps are described. In the present invention, the use of all examples or exemplary terms (e.g., ) is solely for the purpose of illustrating the present invention in detail, and the scope of the present invention is not limited by such examples or exemplary terms unless otherwise limited by the claims. Furthermore, those skilled in the art will understand that various modifications, combinations, and changes may be made within the scope of the claims or their equivalents, with design conditions and factors.

[0389] Therefore, the concept of the present invention should not be limited to the embodiments described above, and not only the claims described later, but also all scopes equivalent to or equivalently modified from these claims, fall within the scope of the concept of the present invention.

Claims

1. A method for evaluating cognitive decline, which is performed by a processor of a testing device for evaluating cognitive decline, An inspection step that inspects the extent to which a user performs the missions presented for each of several inspection items, and calculates an inspection score for each of the said inspection items, A categorization step of classifying at least one of the aforementioned multiple test items into one of the multiple neurocognitive categories based on the type of the test item, The evaluation step includes 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, The aforementioned category classification step is: The step includes classifying one of the aforementioned multiple test items into a first neurocognitive category capable of differentiating cognitive impairment in memory or a fifth neurocognitive category capable of differentiating cognitive impairment in attention execution, The aforementioned inspection step is, The 2-1 test step involves administering a test to the 2-1 test item that assesses the extent to which the subject performs the ability to learn words or pictures while being given predetermined category cues, and calculating the 2-1 test score. The second-second test step involves performing a test on a second-second test item that evaluates how well the words or pictures learned in the second-first test step are remembered after a predetermined time has elapsed, and calculating a second-second test score. Includes an interference inspection step performed between the 2-1 inspection step and the 2-2 inspection step, A testing method for evaluating cognitive decline.

2. The inspection step 2-1 described above is: The steps include: providing a second-instruction statement that displays multiple suggested words and prompts the user to select a word from the multiple suggested words that corresponds to the predetermined category clue; The steps include receiving a word selection result in which one of the multiple presented words is selected in response to the instruction sentence 2-1 above, The process includes the step of calculating a test score by comparing the word selection result with the correct word, A test method for evaluating cognitive decline as described in claim 1.

3. The aforementioned 2-2 inspection step is, The steps include providing a default prompt word along with a second instruction that prompts the user to select whether or not the default prompt word is a word seen in a previous test, The process includes the step of calculating the score for the second-second test by comparing the result of selecting whether the predetermined presented word corresponding to the second-second instruction is a word seen in the previous test with the correct word, A test method for evaluating cognitive decline as described in claim 1.

4. The interference inspection step is at least one of the third to tenth inspections. A test method for evaluating cognitive decline as described in claim 1.

5. The interference inspection step is: The third test step includes performing a test on a third test item that evaluates how accurately and quickly a user can select an arbitrary number that matches a presented symbol image within a predetermined time limit, and calculating a score for the third test. A test method for evaluating cognitive decline as described in claim 1.

6. The aforementioned third inspection step is, The steps include: displaying an arbitrary symbol image in the center of the screen and providing a third instruction that prompts the user to select an arbitrary number that matches the same image as the arbitrary symbol image within a third time limit; A step of storing the selection result for any number that matches to the same image as the arbitrary symbol image in response to the third instruction, The process includes the step of comparing the selection result for the aforementioned number with the correct answer and calculating a third test score, A test method for evaluating cognitive decline according to claim 5.

7. A testing device for evaluating cognitive decline, Processor and It includes a memory that is operablely connected to the processor and stores at least one code that is executed on the processor, When executed via the processor, the memory performs an inspection process that checks to what extent the user performs the missions presented by the processor for each of the multiple inspection items, and calculates the inspection score for each of the multiple inspection items. A categorization process is performed to classify at least one of the aforementioned multiple test items into one of the multiple neurocognitive categories based on the type of the test item. The system stores code that performs an evaluation process to assess 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. The memory, when causing the processor to execute the category classification process, A code is stored that classifies one of the aforementioned multiple test items into either a first neurocognitive category capable of differentiating cognitive decline in memory or a fifth neurocognitive category capable of differentiating cognitive decline in attention execution. The memory allows the processor to execute the category classification process, The test process involves administering a test to the test item 2-1, which assesses the extent to which the subject performs the ability to learn words or pictures while being given predetermined category cues, and calculating the test score for test 2-1. The 2-2 testing process is executed to perform a test on the 2-2 test item, which evaluates how well the words or pictures learned in the 2-1 testing process are remembered after a predetermined time has elapsed, and to calculate the 2-2 test score. A code is stored that causes an interference testing process to be performed between the 2-1 and 2-2 testing processes. A testing device for evaluating cognitive decline.

Images