LAUSR

BACKGROUND To validate the reliability and validity of the Chinese version of the THINC-it tool in adults with major depressive disorder (MDD). METHODS Subjects aged 18 to 65 years (n=117) with MDD were evaluated and compared to age- and sex-matched healthy controls (n=124). Subjects completed the THINC-it, four criteria-related objective cognitive subtests, and the paper version of Perceived Deficits Questionnaire for Depression-5-item (PDQ-5-D). RESULTS There were significant differences in Spotter [Mean difference (MD) Standard errors (SE)=-0.40 (0.17), P=0.018; 95% Confidence intervals (CI) (-0.73 to -0.07)]; Codebreaker [MD (SE)=-0.39 (0.14), P=0.006; 95% CI(-0.67 to -0.11)]; and the overall performance of four objective tests (including variants of IDN, OBK, DSST, and TMT-B) [MD (SE)=-0.30 (0.12), P=0.013; 95% CI (-0.53 to -0.06]) between the two groups. In the HC group, PDQ-5-D retest reliability was good (ICC = 0.841), and the test-retest reliability of the objective cognitive test was relatively low (ICC ranging from 0.123 to 0.545). In the MDD group: Cronbach's α of PDQ-5-D=0.704; all the THINC-it subtests had good concurrent validity (r ranging from 0.343 to 0.835, all P<0.01). LIMITATION The test-retest sample size was relatively small, the educational level and IQ of the control and MDD groups were not completely matched. CONCLUSION The Chinese version of the THINC-it tool exhibits good reliability and validity in adults with MDD. There is a need to incorporate cognitive assessment of adults with MDD broadly. The THINC-it tool is the first tool validated to assess cognition of MDD in a Chinese population.