This page is alzhub.org's plain-English summary of a published study, not the paper itself. It is generated from the record we hold for this study, sourced and linked below — check the original for the full text and methods.

49/100

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 49 out of 100. Digital health tools

Topic: Risk, prevention and care in population studies

Plain-language summary

Early identification of individuals at increased risk of mild cognitive impairment (MCI), a pre-dementia state, can provide a critical window for prompt intervention to prevent or reverse disease progression. Method A longitudinal cohort design (target sample size =200) was utilised to continuously gather information on behaviours associated with the performance of daily tasks and activities related to cognitive and physical function over three years. Results We present preliminary findings from 87 participants (37 MCI, 50 HC; Mage=76.15, SDage=6.20; 74.71% female). Participants with MCI had significantly poorer scores on the MoCA (MMCI=20.62, SDMCI=4.31; MHC=24.08, SDHC=4.23, p<.001) as compared to those with HC. There were no significant differences for the MMSE (MMCI=26.40, SDMCI=2.61; MHC=27.14, SDHC=2.21, p=.160), Geriatric Depression Scale (MMCI=1.35, SDMCI=1.45; MHC=0.84, SDHC=1.20, p=.086), and Pittsburg Sleep Quality Index Scores (MMCI = 10.42, SDMCI =2.73; MHC = 10.40, SDHC =2.55, p=.974). We observed that MCI participants were less active, had fewer daily steps, had a higher frequency of leaving personal belongings at home, and had a shorter total sleep time. We found that FusionART produces the highest level of performance across all three measures of precision, recall and F1 scores (0.91).

What this study adds

Evidence grade: Moderate

This is a follow-up (cohort) study of 87 participants. This ongoing study uses in-home sensors and artificial intelligence to try to detect mild cognitive impairment early, and reports preliminary findings from 87 participants. Reported effect size: 74.71%.

Taken from this record’s own fields, not from reading the paper. The grade is assigned from the abstract’s wording; what that means.

Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris

APA 7th

Rawtaer, I., Jabbar, K. B. A., Subagdja, B., Saffari, E., & Tan, A. (2025). 299. SENSORS IN-HOME FOR ELDER WELLBEING (SINEW): DIGITAL PHENOTYPING AND ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE FOR EARLY DETECTION OF DEMENTIA. The International Journal of Neuropsychopharmacology. https://doi.org/10.1093/ijnp/pyaf052.136

Vancouver

Rawtaer I, Jabbar KBA, Subagdja B, Saffari E, Tan A. 299. SENSORS IN-HOME FOR ELDER WELLBEING (SINEW): DIGITAL PHENOTYPING AND ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE FOR EARLY DETECTION OF DEMENTIA. The International Journal of Neuropsychopharmacology. 2025. doi:10.1093/ijnp/pyaf052.136.

BibTeX

@article{rawtaer2025-f66c6bec,
  author  = {Rawtaer, Iris and Jabbar, Khalid Bin Abdul and Subagdja, Budhitama and Saffari, Ehsan and Tan, Ah‐Hwee},
  title   = {{299. SENSORS IN-HOME FOR ELDER WELLBEING (SINEW): DIGITAL PHENOTYPING AND ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE FOR EARLY DETECTION OF DEMENTIA}},
  journal = {The International Journal of Neuropsychopharmacology},
  year    = {2025},
  doi     = {10.1093/ijnp/pyaf052.136},
  url     = {https://doi.org/10.1093/ijnp/pyaf052.136}
}

Built from the record alzhub holds for this paper, not looked up. Volume, issue and page numbers are not held in the record. Check the citation against the original before you use it.

How to read this study

Design: this is a follow-up (cohort) study. People are observed over time and not assigned to anything, so an association can reflect other differences between groups. Look at how long follow-up lasted, how many dropped out, and whether the authors adjusted for age, education and other health conditions.
Size: the record lists 87 participants. Ask whether that is enough for the question, and who they were.
Effect: the record reports “74.71%”. A statistically significant result can still be small in daily life.

What the evidence grade means here

This page is graded moderate. alzhub.org assigns the grade automatically from keywords in the abstract, not from reading the paper. Moderate means the abstract mentions a cohort, case-control or longitudinal design. It can add at most 5 of the 100 points in the study score, and it is a label about design, not a verdict on whether the findings are true.

New to reading papers? Six questions to ask of any Alzheimer’s study · how we score.

Key findings

Early identification of individuals at increased risk of mild cognitive impairment (MCI), a pre-dementia state, can provide a critical window for prompt intervention to prevent or reverse disease progression.
Method A longitudinal cohort design (target sample size =200) was utilised to continuously gather information on behaviours associated with the performance of daily tasks and activities related to cognitive and physical function over three years.
Results We present preliminary findings from 87 participants (37 MCI, 50 HC; Mage=76.15, SDage=6.20; 74.71% female).
Participants with MCI had significantly poorer scores on the MoCA (MMCI=20.62, SDMCI=4.31; MHC=24.08, SDHC=4.23, p<.001) as compared to those with HC.
There were no significant differences for the MMSE (MMCI=26.40, SDMCI=2.61; MHC=27.14, SDHC=2.21, p=.160), Geriatric Depression Scale (MMCI=1.35, SDMCI=1.45; MHC=0.84, SDHC=1.20, p=.086), and Pittsburg Sleep Quality Index Scores (MMCI = 10.42, SDMCI =2.73; MHC = 10.40, SDHC =2.55, p=.974).

Why it matters

This ongoing study uses in-home sensors and artificial intelligence to try to detect mild cognitive impairment early, and reports preliminary findings from 87 participants. It is a detection study only and does not test any treatment, cure or prevention.

New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Digital health →

Study details

Study designlongitudinal study
Participants87
Effect size74.71%
Evidence strengthModerate

How this study scored 49/100

Published in a peer-reviewed journal, and it is a longitudinal study following the same people over time. Scored zero for randomized / blinded because the record does not state it.

Component	Points	Why
Journal tier	7 / 10	Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (The International Journal of Neuropsychopharmacology)
Journal's citation record	2 / 4	The International Journal of Neuropsychopharmacology: journal h-index 156 (OpenAlex, 2026-10-29)
Study design	7 / 12	A longitudinal study following the same people over time
Strength of evidence	3 / 5	Rated “moderate” in our summary
Peer-review validation	10 / 10	Peer-reviewed. Published as an article in a named peer-reviewed journal.
How recent	4 / 5	2025 — within 3 year(s) of the newest study here
Sample size	1 / 4	87 participants
Effect reported	2 / 3	Effect reported as a number, without an interval or test
Studied in people	3 / 3	Studied in people (participant count stated)
Randomized / blinded	0 / 2	No randomization or blinding stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Times cited	1 / 7	Cited 1 times (OpenAlex, 2026-10-10)
Citations per year	0 / 5	0.3 citations a year over 3 year(s) since 2025
Impact for its field and year	1 / 6	Cited 0.6× the average for papers of its field and year (OpenAlex FWCI)
Cited by studies here	0 / 6	No other study in this library cites it
Still being cited	0 / 4	Cited 1 times in 2024–2026 (2026 still in progress; OpenAlex)
Senior author's track record	2 / 4	Last-listed author Ah‐Hwee Tan: h-index 41 (OpenAlex, whole career)
Institution's track record	1 / 3	National University of Singapore: institution h-index 1,166 (OpenAlex)
Multicenter collaboration	2 / 3	OpenAlex lists 4 institution(s) in 1 country
Indexed in PubMed	1 / 2	Not in PubMed, but has a DOI
Free to read	2 / 2	Free to read
Total	49 / 100	—

What each of these 20 components measures, and what this score is not →

Read the original

Full text: free to read — OpenAlex lists this copy as free to read: the link above (checked 6 Feb 1020).

Studies in the library that share something with this one. The line above each title says what.

Related studies in Digital health tools from nearby years

Also tagged “prevalence”

1,223 studies in the library carry the topic tag “prevalence”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 1,223 tagged studies.

Studies sharing this one's topic tags

Similar studies

More on Digital health tools

See all studies in Digital health tools →