Processor-implemented systems and methods for enhancing cognitive abilities by personalizing cognitive training regimens

• US 10,559,221 B2
• Filed: 05/20/2015
• Issued: 02/11/2020
• Est. Priority Date: 05/21/2014
• Status: Active Grant

• Current Assignee: Akili Interactive Labs, Inc. (Akili, Inc.)
• Original Assignee: Akili Interactive Labs, Inc. (Akili, Inc.)
• Inventors: Martucci, W. E., Piper, Adam, Omernick, Matthew, Gazzaley, Adam, Elenko, Eric, Karanam, Ketki
• Primary Examiner(s): Cuff, Michael A
• Application Number:
  US15/312,557
• Publication Number:
  US 20170098385A1
• Time in Patent Office: 1,728 Days
• Field of Search: 434238
• CPC Class Codes: A61B 5/00 Measuring for diagnostic purposes radiation diagnosis A61B6/00; diagnosis by ultrasonic, sonic or infrasonic waves A61B8/00; Identification of persons
• CPC Class Codes: A61B 5/4088 Diagnosing of monitoring cognitive diseases, e.g. Alzheimer, prion diseases or dementia
• CPC Class Codes: A61B 5/4848 Monitoring or testing the effects of treatment, e.g. of medication
• CPC Class Codes: G09B 19/00 Teaching not covered by other main groups of this subclass teaching or practice apparatus for gun-aiming or gun-laying F41G3/26
• CPC Class Codes: G09B 5/02 with visual presentation of the material to be studied, e.g. using film strip
• CPC Class Codes: G16H 20/70 relating to mental therapies, e.g. psychological therapy or autogenous training
• CPC Class Codes: G16H 30/40 for processing medical images, e.g. editing

Abstract

Systems and methods are provided for the implementation of personalized cognitive training. As an example, a processor-implemented method is provided for enhancing cognitive abilities of a user by personalizing cognitive training regimens through difficulty progression. The method includes: performing a cognitive assessment of a user using a set of assessment tasks; estimating a maximal performance of the user related to the set of assessment tasks; determining a performance range based at least in part on the maximal performance of the user; dividing the performance range into a plurality of progress gates, the plurality of progress gates corresponding to a plurality of task difficulty levels; selecting a first progress gate within the performance range; generating a first set of training tasks associated with the first progress gate; and collecting the user'"'"'s first training responses to the first set of training tasks.

Claims

1. A processor-implemented method for enhancing cognitive abilities of a user by personalizing a cognitive training regimen through difficulty progression, the method comprising:

performing, using one or more data processors, a cognitive assessment of a user using a set of assessment tasks;

estimating, using the one or more data processors, a maximal performance of the user related to the set of assessment tasks;

determining, using the one or more data processors, a performance range based at least in part on the maximal performance of the user;

dividing, using the one or more data processors, the performance range into a plurality of progress gates, the plurality of progress gates corresponding to a plurality of task difficulty levels that the user may perform to progress within the training regimen, data related to the performance range being stored in a data structure in a non-transitory machine-readable storage medium;

selecting, using the one or more data processors, a first progress gate within the performance range;

generating, using the one or more data processors, a first set of training tasks associated with the first progress gate;

collecting the user'"'"'s first training responses to the first set of training tasks;

determining, using the one or more data processors, whether the user succeeds at the first progress gate based at least in part on the user'"'"'s first training responses; and

in response to the user succeeding at the first progress gate,

selecting, using the one or more data processors, a second progress gate within the performance range;

generating, using the one or more data processors, a second set of training tasks associated with the second progress gate; and

collecting the user'"'"'s second training responses to the second set of training tasks for determining whether the user succeeds at the second progress gate,

wherein (i) the plurality of task difficulty levels are within a range personalized for the user, and (ii) difficulties of the generated first and second sets of training tasks are within the personalized range of task difficulty levels.

2. The method of claim 1, further comprising:

determining a plurality of rewards; and

associating the plurality of rewards with the plurality of progress gates.

3. The method of claim 2, further comprising:

in response to the user succeeding at the first progress gate, presenting a first reward associated with the first progress gate to the user.

4. The method of claim 2, further comprising:

in response to the user performing the first set of training tasks for a predetermined duration, presenting a first reward associated with the first progress gate to the user.

5. The method of claim 1, wherein:

the first progress gate corresponds to a first task difficulty level;

the second progress gate corresponds to a second task difficulty level; and

the second task difficulty level is higher than the first task difficulty level.

6. The method of claim 5, further comprising:

in response to the user not succeeding at the first progress gate for a predetermined duration,

determining a third task difficulty level to be associated with the second progress gate, the third task difficulty level being lower than the second task difficulty level;

generating a third set of training tasks according to the third task difficulty level; and

collecting the user'"'"'s third training responses to the third set of training tasks for determining whether the user succeeds at the second progress gate.

7. The method of claim 1, further comprising:

in response to the user not succeeding at the first progress gate,

generating a third set of training tasks associated with the first progress gate; and

collecting the user'"'"'s third training responses to the third set of training tasks for further determining whether the user succeeds at the first progress gate.

8. The method of claim 1, further comprising:

determining whether the user succeeds at the second progress gate based at least in part on the user'"'"'s second training responses;

in response to the user succeeding at the second progress gate,

selecting, using the one or more data processors, a third progress gate within the performance range;

generating, using the one or more data processors, a third set of training tasks associated with the third progress gate; and

collecting the user'"'"'s third training responses to the third set of training tasks for determining whether the user succeeds at the third progress gate.

9. The method of claim 1, further comprising:

determining a baseline performance of the user related to the set of assessment tasks;

wherein the performance range is determined based at least in part on the baseline performance and the maximal performance of the user.

10. The method of claim 9, wherein:

the baseline performance is determined based at least in part on the user'"'"'s performance of the set of assessment tasks in a distracting environment; and

the maximal performance is determined based at least in part on the user'"'"'s performance of the set of assessment tasks in an isolated environment.

11. The method of claim 9, wherein:

the baseline performance is determined based at least in part on the user'"'"'s performance of the set of assessment tasks in a dual-task situation or a multi-task situation; and

the maximal performance is determined based at least in part on the user'"'"'s performance of the set of assessment tasks in a single-task situation.

12. The method of claim 1, wherein the maximal performance is determined by an extension or an extrapolation based at least in part on the user'"'"'s performance of the set of assessment tasks.

13. The method of claim 1, wherein the maximal performance is determined by using data distributions from normative data curves or comparison data of individuals of a target population performing the set of assessment tasks.

14. The method of claim 1, wherein:

the first set of training tasks are presented to the user through a user interface;

the user'"'"'s first training responses to the first set of training tasks are collected through the user interface;

the second set of training tasks are presented to the user through the user interface; and

the user'"'"'s second training responses to the second set of training tasks are collected through the user interface.

35. A method for enhancing a cognitive ability in a subject in need thereof, wherein said method comprises performing by the subject the processor-implemented method of any one of claims 1 to 30.

36. The method of claim 35, wherein the subject'"'"'s cognitive ability is assessed by a cognitive ability test, wherein the cognitive ability test is selected from the group consisting of Mini Mental State Exam, CANTAB cognitive battery, Repeatable Battery for the Assessment of Neuropsychological Status, Clinical Global Impression scales, Clinician'"'"'s interview-Based Impression of Change, Severe Impairment Battery, Alzheimer'"'"'s Disease Assessment Scale, Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale, Schizophrenia Cognition Rating Scale, Conners Adult ADHD Rating Scales, Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression, Hamilton Anxiety Scale, Montgomery-Asberg Depressing Rating scale, Young Mania Rating Scale, Children'"'"'s Depression Rating Scale, Penn State Worry Questionnaire, Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, Aberrant Behavior Checklist, Activities of Daily Living scales, General Practitioner Assessment of Cognition, Eriksen Flanker Task, Stroop Task, Intelligence quotient, Raven'"'"'s Progressive Matrices, Behavior Rating Inventory of Executive Function (BRIEF), Test of Everyday Attention (and Test of Everyday Attention for Children), Test of Memory and Learning, Wisconsin Card Scoring Test, and Delis Kaplan Executive Function System.

37. The method of claim 35, wherein the subject'"'"'s cognitive ability is enhanced as indicated by a score improvement in a cognitive ability test, wherein the cognitive ability test is selected from the group consisting of Mini Mental State Exam, CANTAB cognitive battery, Repeatable Battery for the Assessment of Neuropsychological Status, Clinical Global Impression scales, Clinician'"'"'s interview-Based Impression of Change, Severe Impairment Battery, Alzheimer'"'"'s Disease Assessment Scale, Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale, Schizophrenia Cognition Rating Scale, Conners Adult ADHD Rating Scales, Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression, Hamilton Anxiety Scale, Montgomery-Asberg Depressing Rating scale, Young Mania Rating Scale, Children'"'"'s Depression Rating Scale, Penn State Worry Questionnaire, Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, Aberrant Behavior Checklist, Activities of Daily Living scales, General Practitioner Assessment of Cognition, Eriksen Flanker Task, Stroop Task, Intelligence quotient, Raven'"'"'s Progressive Matrices, Behavior Rating Inventory of Executive Function (BRIEF), Test of Everyday Attention (and Test of Everyday Attention for Children), Test of Memory and Learning, Wisconsin Card Scoring Test, and Delis Kaplan Executive Function System.

38. The method of claim 35, wherein the subject'"'"'s cognitive ability is assessed by pre-training and post-training physiological tests that measure internal markers of disease or health such as detection of amyloid beta, cortisol and other stress response markers;

and brain imaging studies that assess a condition based on presence of specific neural signatures.

39. The method of claim 35, wherein the subject suffers from age-related cognitive decline, mild cognitive impairment, Alzheimer'"'"'s disease, Parkinson'"'"'s disease, Huntington'"'"'s disease, depression, schizophrenia, dementia, Pick'"'"'s disease, cognitive deficit associated with fatigue, multiple sclerosis, post traumatic stress disorder, obsessive-compulsive disorder, brain damage, anxiety, stress, panic, depression, dysphoria, malaise, attention deficit disorder, Autism Spectrum Disorder, chronic neurological illnesses or chronic psychiatric illnesses.

40. A method of monitoring a treatment of a disease that results in impaired cognition in a subject, said method comprising:

(i) performing by the subject the processor-implemented method of any one of claims 1 to 30 to obtain a first set of performance data;

(ii) administering to the subject a treatment for said disease for a period of time;

(iii) after the period of time, performing by the subject the processor-implemented method of any one of claims 1 to 30 to obtain a second set of performance data;

(iv) comparing first set of performance data and the second set of performance data; and

(v) adjusting the treatment for said disease in the subject.

15. A processor-implemented method for enhancing cognitive abilities of a user by personalizing a cognitive training regimen through difficulty progression, the method comprising:

performing, using one or more data processors, an initial cognitive assessment of a user using a first set of assessment tasks;

estimating, using the one or more data processors, an initial maximal performance of the user related to the first set of assessment tasks;

determining, using the one or more data processors, the initial performance range based at least in part on the initial maximal performance of the user;

dividing, using the one or more data processors, the initial performance range into a first plurality of progress gates, the first plurality of progress gates corresponding to a first plurality of task difficulty levels that the user may perform to progress within the training regimen, data related to the initial performance range being stored in a first data structure in a non-transitory machine-readable storage medium;

selecting, using the one or more data processors, a first progress gate within the initial performance range;

generating, using the one or more data processors, a first set of training tasks associated with the first progress gate;

collecting the user'"'"'s first training responses to the first set of training tasks;

determining, using the one or more data processors, whether the user succeeds at the first progress gate based at least in part on the user'"'"'s first training responses; and

in response to the user succeeding at the first progress gate,

performing, using the one or more data processors, a cognitive assessment of the user using a second set of assessment tasks;

estimating, using the one or more data processors, an updated maximal performance of the user related to the second set of assessment tasks;

determining, using the one or more data processors, an updated performance range based at least in part on the updated maximal performance of the user, data related to the updated performance range being stored in a second data structure in the non-transitory machine-readable storage medium;

dividing, using the one or more data processors, the updated performance range into a second plurality of progress gates, the second plurality of progress gates corresponding to a second plurality of task difficulty levels;

selecting, using the one or more data processors, a second progress gate within the updated performance range;

generating, using the one or more data processors, a second set of training tasks associated with the second progress gate; and

collecting the user'"'"'s second training responses to the second set of training tasks for determining whether the user succeeds at the second progress gate,

wherein (i) each of the first and second pluralities of task difficulty levels are within a range personalized for the user, and (ii) difficulties of the generated first and second sets of training tasks are within the personalized range of task difficulty levels.

16. The method of claim 15, further comprising:

determining a plurality of rewards; and

associating the plurality of rewards with the first plurality of progress gates.

17. The method of claim 16, further comprising:

in response to the user succeeding at the first progress gate, presenting a first reward associated with the first progress gate to the user.

18. The method of claim 16, further comprising:

in response to the user performing a predetermined number of training tasks associated with the first progress gate, presenting a first reward associated with the first progress gate to the user.

19. The method of claim 16, further comprising:

in response to the user performing the first set of training tasks for a predetermined duration, presenting a first reward associated with the first progress gate to the user.

20. The method of claim 16, further comprising:

in response to the user advancing from the first progress gate to the second progress gate within a predetermined time period, presenting a first reward associated with the first progress gate to the user.

21. The method of claim 15, further comprising:

determining a plurality of rewards; and

associating the plurality of rewards with the second plurality of progress gates.

22. The method of claim 15, wherein:

the first progress gate corresponds to a first task difficulty level;

the second progress gate corresponds to a second task difficulty level; and

the second task difficulty level is higher than the first task difficulty level.

23. The method of claim 15, further comprising:

in response to the user not succeeding at the first progress gate,

generating a third set of training tasks associated with the first progress gate; and

collecting the user'"'"'s third training responses to the third set of training tasks for further determining whether the user succeeds at the first progress gate.

24. The method of claim 15, further comprising:

determining whether the user succeeds at the second progress gate based at least in part on the user'"'"'s second training responses;

in response to the user succeeding at the second progress gate,

performing a cognitive assessment of the user using a third set of assessment tasks;

estimating a third maximal performance of the user related to the third set of assessment tasks;

determining a third performance range based at least in part on the updated maximal performance of the user;

dividing the third performance range into a third plurality of progress gates, the third plurality of progress gates corresponding to a third plurality of task difficulty levels;

selecting a third progress gate within the third performance range;

generating a third set of training tasks associated with the third progress gate; and

collecting the user'"'"'s third training responses to the third set of training tasks for determining whether the user succeeds at the third progress gate.

25. The method of claim 15, further comprising:

determining an initial baseline performance of the user related to the first set of assessment tasks;

wherein the initial performance range is determined based at least in part on the initial baseline performance and the initial maximal performance of the user.

26. The method of claim 25, wherein:

the initial baseline performance is determined based at least in part on the user'"'"'s performance of the first set of assessment tasks in a distracting environment; and

the initial maximal performance is determined based at least in part on the user'"'"'s performance of the first set of assessment tasks in an isolated environment.

27. The method of claim 25, wherein:

the initial baseline performance is determined based at least in part on the user'"'"'s performance of the first set of assessment tasks in a dual-task situation or a multi-task situation; and

the initial maximal performance is determined based at least in part on the user'"'"'s performance of the first set of assessment tasks in a single-task situation.

28. The method of claim 15, wherein the initial maximal performance is determined by an extension or an extrapolation based at least in part on the user'"'"'s performance of the first set of assessment tasks.

29. The method of claim 15, wherein the initial maximal performance is determined by using data distributions from normative data curves or comparison data of individuals of a target population performing the first set of assessment tasks.

30. The method of claim 15, further comprising:

selecting, using the one or more data processors, a third progress gate within the initial performance range, prior to the selection of the first progress gate;

generating, using the one or more data processors, a third set of training tasks associated with the third progress gate;

collecting the user'"'"'s third training responses to the third set of training tasks; and

determining, using the one or more data processors, whether the user succeeds at the third progress gate based at least in part on the user'"'"'s third training responses;

wherein the first progress gate within the initial performance range is selected in response to the user succeeding at the third progress gate.

31. A processor-implemented system for enhancing cognitive abilities of a user by personalizing a cognitive training regimen through difficulty progression, the system comprising:

one or more processors configured to;

perform a cognitive assessment of a user using a set of assessment tasks;

estimate a maximal performance of the user related to the set of assessment tasks;

determine a performance range based at least in part on the maximal performance of the user;

divide the performance range into a plurality of progress gates, the plurality of progress gates corresponding to a plurality of task difficulty levels that the user may perform to progress within the training regimen;

select a first progress gate within the performance range;

generate a first set of training tasks associated with the first progress gate;

collect the user'"'"'s first training responses to the first set of training tasks;

determine whether the user succeeds at the first progress gate based at least in part on the user'"'"'s first training responses; and

in response to the user succeeding at the first progress gate,

select a second progress gate within the performance range;

generate a second set of training tasks associated with the second progress gate; and

collect the user'"'"'s second training responses to the second set of training tasks to determine whether the user succeeds at the second progress gate; and

one or more non-transitory machine-readable storage media configured to store data related to the first set of training tasks, data related to the second set of training tasks, and data related to the performance range,

wherein (i) the plurality of task difficulty levels are within a range personalized for the user, and (ii) difficulties of the generated first and second sets of training tasks are within the personalized range of task difficulty levels.

32. A processor-implemented system for enhancing cognitive abilities of a user by personalizing a cognitive training regimen through difficulty progression, the system comprising:

one or more processors configured to;

perform an initial cognitive assessment of a user using a first set of assessment tasks;

estimate an initial maximal performance of the user related to the first set of assessment tasks;

determine the initial performance range based at least in part on the initial maximal performance of the user;

divide the initial performance range into a first plurality of progress gates, the first plurality of progress gates corresponding to a first plurality of task difficulty levels that the user may perform to progress within the training regimen;

select a first progress gate within the initial performance range;

generate a first set of training tasks associated with the first progress gate;

collect the user'"'"'s first training responses to the first set of training tasks;

determine whether the user succeeds at the first progress gate based at least in part on the user'"'"'s first training responses; and

in response to the user succeeding at the first progress gate,

perform a cognitive assessment of the user using a second set of assessment tasks;

estimate an updated maximal performance of the user related to the second set of assessment tasks;

determine an updated performance range based at least in part on the updated maximal performance of the user;

divide the updated performance range into a second plurality of progress gates, the second plurality of progress gates corresponding to a second plurality of task difficulty levels that the user may perform to progress within the training regimen;

select a second progress gate within the updated performance range;

generate a second set of training tasks associated with the second progress gate; and

collect the user'"'"'s second training responses to the second set of training tasks to determine whether the user succeeds at the second progress gate; and

one or more non-transitory machine-readable storage media configured to store data related to the first set of training tasks, data related to the second set of training tasks, date related to the initial performance range, and data related to the updated performance range,

wherein (i) the first and second pluralities of task difficulty levels are within a range personalized for the user, and (ii) difficulties of the generated first and second sets of training tasks are within the personalized range of task difficulty levels.

33. A non-transitory computer-readable medium encoded with instructions for commanding one or more processors to execute operations of a method for enhancing cognitive abilities of a user by personalizing a cognitive training regimen through difficulty progression, the method comprising:

performing a cognitive assessment of a user using a set of assessment tasks;

estimating a maximal performance of the user related to the set of assessment tasks;

determining a performance range based at least in part on the maximal performance of the user;

dividing the performance range into a plurality of progress gates, the plurality of progress gates corresponding to a plurality of task difficulty levels that the user may perform to progress within the training regimen;

selecting a first progress gate within the performance range;

generating a first set of training tasks associated with the first progress gate;

collecting the user'"'"'s first training responses to the first set of training tasks;

determining whether the user succeeds at the first progress gate based at least in part on the user'"'"'s first training responses; and

in response to the user succeeding at the first progress gate,

selecting a second progress gate within the performance range;

generating a second set of training tasks associated with the second progress gate; and

collecting the user'"'"'s second training responses to the second set of training tasks for determining whether the user succeeds at the second progress gate,

wherein (i) the plurality of task difficulty levels are within a range personalized for the user, and (ii) difficulties of the generated first and second sets of training tasks are within the personalized range of task difficulty levels.

34. A non-transitory computer-readable medium encoded with instructions for commanding one or more processors to execute operations of a method for enhancing cognitive abilities of a user by personalizing a cognitive training regimen through difficulty progression, the method comprising:

performing an initial cognitive assessment of a user using a first set of assessment tasks;

estimating an initial maximal performance of the user related to the first set of assessment tasks;

determining the initial performance range based at least in part on the initial maximal performance of the user;

dividing the initial performance range into a first plurality of progress gates, the first plurality of progress gates corresponding to a first plurality of task difficulty levels that the user may perform to progress within the training regimen;

selecting a first progress gate within the initial performance range;

generating a first set of training tasks associated with the first progress gate;

collecting the user'"'"'s first training responses to the first set of training tasks;

determining whether the user succeeds at the first progress gate based at least in part on the user'"'"'s first training responses; and

in response to the user succeeding at the first progress gate,

performing a cognitive assessment of the user using a second set of assessment tasks;

estimating an updated maximal performance of the user related to the second set of assessment tasks;

determining an updated performance range based at least in part on the updated maximal performance of the user;

dividing the updated performance range into a second plurality of progress gates, the second plurality of progress gates corresponding to a second plurality of task difficulty levels that the user may perform to progress within the training regimen;

selecting a second progress gate within the updated performance range;

generating a second set of training tasks associated with the second progress gate; and

collecting the user'"'"'s second training responses to the second set of training tasks for determining whether the user succeeds at the second progress gate,

wherein (i) the first and second pluralities of task difficulty levels are within a range personalized for the user, and (ii) difficulties of the generated first and second sets of training tasks are within the personalized range of task difficulty levels.