Comprehensive Demographic Correction Improves Sensitivity and Reduces Bias in Cognitive Assessment

Background. Scores on neuropsychological assessments are typically corrected for the influences of age, education, and gender (AEG). However, other demographic factors, such as crystallized ability and race/ethnicity, independently affect test performance. As a result, standard scores systematically over- or under-classify impairment in patients whose demographic profile differs from that of the reference population. Methods. We developed a Comprehensive (C-) model scoring algorithm that added vocabulary, age-squared, race/ethnicity, Latino background, a coarse socioeconomic status proxy, computer use, and daily prescription medications to the standard AEG predictor pool. The model was developed using data from 1,914 community-dwelling adults assessed with the California Cognitive Assessment Battery (CCAB; Woods et al., 2024). For each of 118 individual cognitive measures, stability-selection LASSO identified robust predictors in 300 random 80/20 splits retained at >=80% frequency and then estimated mean coefficients and confidence intervals in 1,000 bootstrap OLS samples. Cross-sample frozen-coefficient validation was used to evaluate scoring model generalization in two subgroups: Group 1 (n = 1,033, older, first enrolled cohort) and Group 2 (n = 881, a recently recruited younger cohort). Results. Stability selection retained a mean of 2.81 predictors per measure (range 1-6). Compared to the AEG model, the C-model approximately doubled variance explained (r2 = 0.50 vs 0.25; mean across cognitive domains r2 = 0.32 vs 0.18) and outperformed AEG in 98.8% of individual measures with non-trivial demographic signal. Racial disparities in MCI classification (the bottom-7th-percentile) were substantially reduced: Black-vs-White ratios fell from 5.6 (AEG) to 1.8 (C). Conversely, sensitivity was improved in individuals with elevated premorbid function: MCI classification ratios in low-vs-high vocabulary quartiles fell from 11.3 to 2.1. AIC favored the C-model in 88.1% of measures (mean delta-AIC = -167), ruling out overfitting. Frozen-coefficient validation preserved the C-model's r2 advantage in every cognitive domain. Conclusions. By correcting scores for race, premorbid cognitive functioning (vocabulary), and other demographic predictors, the C-model explains substantially more variance than the AEG model, reduces racial bias, and increases sensitivity to cognitive decline in high-functioning participants. C and AEG models can be used in parallel: model concordance increases diagnostic confidence, while disagreement carries diagnostic information.