Home › Research › Cognitive tests and assessment
Boston cognitive assessment (BOCA) - a comprehensive self-administered smartphone- and computer-based at-home test for longitudinal tracking of cognitive performance
Vyshedskiy A, Netson R, Fridberg E, Jagadeesan P, Arnold M, Barnett S, Gondalia A, Maslova V et al.. BMC neurology, 2022-03-15
Topic: Brain imaging, connectivity and assessment
Longitudinal cognitive testing is essential for developing novel preventive interventions for dementia and Alzheimer's disease; however, the few available tools have significant practice effect and depend on an external evaluator. We developed a self-administered 10-min at-home test intended for longitudinal cognitive monitoring, Boston Cognitive Assessment or BOCA. The goal of this project was to validate BOCA. BOCA uses randomly selected non-repeating tasks to minimize practice effects. BOCA evaluates eight cognitive domains: 1) Memory/Immediate Recall, 2) Combinatorial Language Comprehension/Prefrontal Synthesis, 3) Visuospatial Reasoning/Mental rotation, 4) Executive function/Clock Test, 5) Attention, 6) Mental math, 7) Orientation, and 8) Memory/Delayed Recall. BOCA was administered to patients with cognitive impairment (n = 50) and age- and education-matched controls (n = 50). Test scores were significantly different between patients and controls (p < 0.001) suggesting good discriminative ability. The Cronbach's alpha was 0.87 implying good internal consistency. BOCA demonstrated strong correlation with Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) (R = 0.90, p < 0.001). The study revealed strong (R = 0.94, p < 0.001) test-retest reliability of the total BOCA score one week after participants' initial administration. The practice effect tested by daily BOCA administration over 10 days was insignificant (β = 0.03, p = 0.68). The effect of the screen size tested by BOCA administration on a large computer screen and re-administration of the BOCA to the same participant on a smartphone was insignificant (β = 0.82, p = 0.17; positive β indicates greater score on a smartphone). BOCA has the potential to reduce the cost and improve the quality of longitudinal cognitive tracking essential for testing novel interventions designed to reduce or reverse cognitive aging. BOCA is available online gratis at www.bocatest.org .
Key findings
- Longitudinal cognitive testing is essential for developing novel preventive interventions for dementia and Alzheimer's disease; however, the few available tools have significant practice effect and depend on an external evaluator.
- Test scores were significantly different between patients and controls (p < 0.001) suggesting good discriminative ability.
- BOCA demonstrated strong correlation with Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) (R = 0.90, p < 0.001).
- The study revealed strong (R = 0.94, p < 0.001) test-retest reliability of the total BOCA score one week after participants' initial administration.
Study details
- Study designlongitudinal study
- Participants50
- Evidence strengthModerate
How this study scored 66/100
Published in a peer-reviewed journal, and it is a longitudinal study following the same people over time. Scored zero for effect reported and randomised / blinded because the record does not state it. We have no data on journal's citation record, times cited, citations per year, impact for its field and year, cited by studies here, still being cited, senior author's track record, institution's track record and multi-centre collaboration, so those were left out: it earned 38 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 66 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 7 / 10 | Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (BMC neurology) |
| Journal's citation record | — / 4 | No journal record from OpenAlex — left out of this score |
| 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 | 3 / 5 | 2022 — within 6 year(s) of the newest study here |
| Sample size | 1 / 4 | 50 participants |
| Effect reported | 0 / 3 | No effect size reported — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Studied in people | 3 / 3 | Studied in people (participant count stated) |
| Randomised / blinded | 0 / 2 | No randomisation or blinding stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Times cited | — / 7 | No citation count (not found in OpenAlex) — left out of this score |
| Citations per year | — / 5 | No citation count or no year — left out of this score |
| Impact for its field and year | — / 6 | No field-weighted citation impact (OpenAlex has none yet) — left out of this score |
| Cited by studies here | — / 6 | Not yet checked against this library's citation graph — left out of this score |
| Still being cited | — / 4 | No yearly citation counts — left out of this score |
| Senior author's track record | — / 4 | Senior author's record not available — left out of this score |
| Institution's track record | — / 3 | No institution listed in OpenAlex — left out of this score |
| Multi-centre collaboration | — / 3 | Institutions not listed — left out of this score |
| Indexed in PubMed | 2 / 2 | Indexed in PubMed (PMID 35291958) |
| Free to read | 2 / 2 | Free to read |
| Points | 38 / 58 | Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 38 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 66 out of 100. |
| Total | 66 / 100 | — |
What each of these 20 components measures, and what this score is not →
Read the original
Free copy unknown: no free-copy check has an answer for this record yet. That does not mean it is paywalled.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
Built from the record alzhub holds for this paper, not looked up. Volume, issue and page numbers are not held in the record. The record's author list ends in “et al.”, so not every author is named. Check the citation against the original before you use it.
APA 7th
Vyshedskiy, A., Netson, R., Fridberg, E., Jagadeesan, P., Arnold, M., Barnett, S., et al. (2022). Boston cognitive assessment (BOCA) - a comprehensive self-administered smartphone- and computer-based at-home test for longitudinal tracking of cognitive performance. BMC neurology. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12883-022-02620-6
Vancouver
Vyshedskiy A, Netson R, Fridberg E, Jagadeesan P, Arnold M, Barnett S, et al. Boston cognitive assessment (BOCA) - a comprehensive self-administered smartphone- and computer-based at-home test for longitudinal tracking of cognitive performance. BMC neurology. 2022. doi:10.1186/s12883-022-02620-6. PMID: 35291958.
BibTeX
@article{vyshedskiy2022-35291958,
author = {Vyshedskiy, A. and Netson, R. and Fridberg, E. and Jagadeesan, P. and Arnold, M. and Barnett, S. and Gondalia, A. and Maslova, V. and others},
title = {{Boston cognitive assessment (BOCA) - a comprehensive self-administered smartphone- and computer-based at-home test for longitudinal tracking of cognitive performance}},
journal = {BMC neurology},
year = {2022},
doi = {10.1186/s12883-022-02620-6},
pmid = {35291958},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1186/s12883-022-02620-6}
}
Related studies in Cognitive tests and assessment
Also tagged “computerized”
238 studies in the library carry the topic tag “computerized”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 238 tagged studies.