cantab test review
DESCRIPTION
TRANSCRIPT
CANTAB – BRIEF UPDATE
David Secker, Chief Scientific Officer Cambridge Cognition LTD.
Cognitive Performance WorkshopLas Vegas, July 2005
Background
•CANTAB = CAmbridge Neuropsychological Test Automated Battery.
•CANTAB was first designed and used by Trevor Robbins, Adrian Owen and Barbara Sahakian from Cambridge University in 1986, and thus has over 20 years of validation underpinning the paradigm.
•CANTAB has now been used in over 400 universities and research institutions, in 34 countries.
•CANTAB is cited in over 350 peer-reviewed publications.
CANTAB tests of cognition – was 15, now 19
Motor Screening (MOT)
Screens for visual, movement and comprehension difficulties.
Pattern Recognition
Memory (PRM)
Tests visual recognition memory for patterns
Affective Go/No-go (AGN)
Assesses information processing biases for positive and negative stimuli.
Rapid Visual Information
Processing (RVP)
Tests sustained visual attention.
Big/Little Circle (BLC)
Tests comprehension, learning and reversal.
Stockings of Cambridge
(SOC)
Assesses spatial planning and motor control
Delayed Matching to
Sample (DMS)
Assesses immediate and delayed perceptual matching.
Spatial Recognition
Memory (SRM)
Tests recognition memory for spatial locations.
Intra-Extra Dimensional Set Shifting
(IED)
Tests rule acquisition, problem solving, and attentional set shifting.
Spatial Span (SSP)
Spatial Working Memory
(SWM)
Verbal Recognition
Memory (VRM)
Assesses working memory capacity.
Tests working memory and strategy use.
Assesses immediate free recall, and immediate and delayed recognition memory.
Matching to Sample
Visual Search (MTS)
Paired Associates
Learning (PAL)
Reaction Time (RTI)
Ability to match visual samples & measures reaction time.
Assesses episodic memory and learning rate.
Measures speed of response.
CANTAB is fully computerized and operates on a touch sensitive panel
computer.
Where millisecond accuracy is required for
latency recording a press pad is
used.
CANTAB was designed to extrapolate first principles from fundamental
animal models.
Pattern/Spatial recognition
Delayed matching to sample
Paired associate learning
Set shifting
Spatial Working Memory
Temporal /
Frontal
Frontal Parietal
Temporal
Frontal Temporal
Frontal
Planning
5-Choice serial reaction time
Frontal
Frontal
Versions for lower primates exist for many CANTAB tests.(see Roberts & Sahakian, 1993)
Reflection Impulsivity Task (RIT)
By pressing the grey boxes in a 5 X 5 matrix, the subject
sees what the colour beneath is.
When the subject thinks she knows which is the predominant colour in the matrix, she decides by pressing one of the two squares below
Reflection Impulsivity Task (RIT)
Fixed Win condition – 100 points earned for a correct decision, regardless of how many boxes opened.
Decreasing Win condition – fewer points available as more boxes ‘opened’.
Reflection Impulsivity Task (RIT)
Outputs:
‘Information sampled’ = mean number of boxes opened at point of decision
‘Probability Correct’ = The chance that the decision will be correct controlling for the number of boxes open (range 0 – 1.0)
Reflection Impulsivity Task (RIT)
Study – Luke Clark (2005, in press).
RIT administered to current substance users dependent upon amphetamines (n=24) or opiates
(n=40), former users of amphetamines or opiates abstinent
for at least one year (n=24) and non-drug using controls (n=26).
0.6
0.65
0.7
0.75
0.8
0.85
0.9
Control Amph Opiate Ex-user
P(c
orr
ec
t) a
t d
ec
isio
n
Reflection Impulsivity Task (RIT)
Decision Making
COLD Decisions
Decisions where the outcome does not involve conflict between rewards and punishment. Usually made with little emotion and when there is sufficient time to reflect.
HOT Decisions
Decisions which involve a conflict between reward and punishment. Tend to produce high levels of emotion.
Decision making tends to be considered an executive function predominantly frontal in nature
Conclusions
‘Reduced reflection is suggested to represent a cognitive marker for substance dependence that does
not recover with prolonged abstinence and is associated
with multiple drugs of abuse’.
Work
‘Cold’ Decision – time to reflect, all outcomes seem relatively similar.
Home
‘Hot’ Decision – can result in high punishment OR reward
Is the yellow token under a red or a blue
box?
Subject must guess.
Red\Blue ratio can be 9:1, 8:2,
7:3, or 6:4
Cambridge Gambling Task (CGT)
Cambridge Gambling Task
Subject is allocated a certain number of points which they can use to gamble with (number on
the left).
The yellow number is a proportion of their remaining points (5%, 25%, 75%, 100%)
and changes rapidly in either a descending or ascending
direction. The subject presses this when the number reflects
the amount they are prepared to gamble
Here the subject incorrectly guessed that the yellow token was under a red square – and
lost 704 points. He has only 37 remaining.
Key variable – ‘Adjusted Risk’ tendency to bet a larger proportion of ones points when the odds are better, and the less
when the odds are poorer.
Cambridge Gambling Task
Orbitofrontal stimulation
(see Rogers et al, 1999).
Activation of Right Orbitofrontal Cortex
CANTAB – Tower of London Test (aka SOC).
Dorsolateral PFC/Parietal activation
(see Baker et al 1996)Owen et al 1995
Dorsolateral Prefrontal Cortex
Orbitofrontal Cortex
‘Cold’ Decisions
‘Hot’ Decisions
Further information:
Contact:
David L SeckerCambridge Cognition Ltd
Tunbridge CourtTunbridge Lane, Bottisham
Cambridge CB5 9DU +44(0)1223 810 700
www.cantab.com [email protected]