Home › Research › Cognitive tests and assessment
Computerised cognitive testing of individuals with Down's syndrome and Alzheimer's disease
Michael Gutman, Ethan Moskovic, Joseph S Jeret. Journal of intellectual disability research : JIDR, 2015-09-16
Topic: Brain imaging, connectivity and assessment
Mean scaled scores in this longitudinal study were evaluated with repeated measures analysis of variance. Memory, executive function, verbal function and visual spatial function scores did not significantly change. There was no significant depression or anxiety on self-reported measures. Reproducibility of test results supports the reliability of this battery to quantify function and prospectively follow performance in this population over an 18-month period.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Gutman, M., Moskovic, E., & Jeret, J. S. (2016). Computerised cognitive testing of individuals with Down's syndrome and Alzheimer's disease. Journal of intellectual disability research : JIDR. https://doi.org/10.1111/jir.12227
Vancouver
Gutman M, Moskovic E, Jeret JS. Computerised cognitive testing of individuals with Down's syndrome and Alzheimer's disease. Journal of intellectual disability research : JIDR. 2016. doi:10.1111/jir.12227. PMID: 26373353.
BibTeX
@article{gutman2016-26373353,
author = {Gutman, Michael and Moskovic, Ethan and Jeret, Joseph S},
title = {{Computerised cognitive testing of individuals with Down's syndrome and Alzheimer's disease}},
journal = {Journal of intellectual disability research : JIDR},
year = {2016},
doi = {10.1111/jir.12227},
pmid = {26373353},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1111/jir.12227}
}
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.
Key findings
- Mean scaled scores in this longitudinal study were evaluated with repeated measures analysis of variance.
- Memory, executive function, verbal function and visual spatial function scores did not significantly change.
- There was no significant depression or anxiety on self-reported measures.
- Reproducibility of test results supports the reliability of this battery to quantify function and prospectively follow performance in this population over an 18-month period.
Study details
- Study designlongitudinal study
- Participants14
- Evidence strengthModerate
How this study scored 61/100
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, multi-centre collaboration and free to read, so those were left out: it earned 34 of the 56 points we could judge it on, which is 61 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 7 / 10 | Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Journal of intellectual disability research : JIDR) |
| 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 | 1 / 5 | 2016 — within 20 year(s) of the newest study here |
| Sample size | 1 / 4 | 14 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 26373353) |
| Free to read | — / 2 | Access not recorded — left out of this score |
| Points | 34 / 56 | Scored on 10 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 34 of the 56 points we could judge it on is 61 out of 100. |
| Total | 61 / 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.
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.