To introduce the Emory 10-element Complex Figure (CF) scoring system and recognition task. We evaluated the relationship between Emory CF scoring and traditional Osterrieth CF scoring approach in cognitively healthy volunteers. Additionally, a cohort of patients undergoing deep brain stimulation (DBS) evaluation was assessed to compare the scoring methods in a clinical population.

The study included 315 volunteers from the Emory Healthy Brain Study (EHBS) with Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) scores of 24/30 or higher. The clinical group consisted of 84 DBS candidates. Scoring time differences were analyzed in a subset of 48 DBS candidates.

High correlations between scoring methods were present for non-recognition components in both cohorts (EHBS: Copy r = 0.76, Immediate r = 0.86, Delayed r = 0.85, Recognition r = 47; DBS: Copy r = 0.80, Immediate r = 0.84, Delayed Recall r = 0.85, Recognition r = 0.37). Emory CF scoring times were significantly shorter than Osterrieth times across non-recognition conditions (all p < 0.00001, individual Cohen’s d: 1.4–2.4), resulting in an average time savings of 57%. DBS patients scored lower than EHBS participants across CF memory measures, with larger effect sizes for Emory CF scoring (Cohen’s d range = 1.0–1.2). Emory CF scoring demonstrated better group classification in logistic regression models, improving DBS candidate classification from 16.7% to 32.1% compared to Osterrieth scoring.

Emory CF scoring yields results that are highly correlated with traditional Osterrieth scoring, significantly reduces scoring time burden, and demonstrates greater sensitivity to memory decline in DBS candidates. Its efficiency and sensitivity make Emory CF scoring well-suited for broader implementation in clinical research.