Home › Research › Cognitive tests and assessment
Current Advances in Computerized Cognitive Assessment for Mild Cognitive Impairment and Dementia in Older Adults: A Systematic Review
Henkel C, Seibert S, Nichols Widmann C.. Dementia and geriatric cognitive disorders, 2024-09-28
Topic: Risk, prevention and care in population studies
Introduction Timely detection of cognitive impairment such as mild cognitive impairment (MCI) or dementia is pivotal in initiating early interventions to improve patients' quality of life. Conventional paper-pencil tests, though common, have limited sensitivity in detecting subtle cognitive changes. Computerized assessments offer promising alternatives, overcoming time and manual scoring constraints while potentially providing greater sensitivity. Methods A literature search yielded 26 eligible articles (2020-2023). The articles were reviewed according to PRISMA guidelines, and the computerized tools were categorized by diagnostic outcome (MCI, dementia, combined). Results The subjects included in the studies were aged 55-77 years. The overall gender distribution comprised 60% females and 40% males. The sample sizes varied considerably from 22 to 4,486. Convergent validity assessments in 20 studies demonstrated strong positive correlations with traditional tests. Overall classification accuracy in detecting MCI or dementia, distinguishing from normal cognition (NC), reached up to 91%. Impressively, 46% of the studies received high-quality ratings, underscoring the reliability and validity of the findings. Conclusion The review highlights the advancements in computerized cognitive assessments for assessing MCI and dementia. This shift toward technology-based assessments could enhance detection capabilities and facilitate timely interventions for better patient outcomes.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Henkel, C., Seibert, S., & Nichols Widmann, C. (2025). Current Advances in Computerized Cognitive Assessment for Mild Cognitive Impairment and Dementia in Older Adults: A Systematic Review. Dementia and geriatric cognitive disorders. https://doi.org/10.1159/000541627
Vancouver
Henkel C, Seibert S, Nichols Widmann C. Current Advances in Computerized Cognitive Assessment for Mild Cognitive Impairment and Dementia in Older Adults: A Systematic Review. Dementia and geriatric cognitive disorders. 2025. doi:10.1159/000541627. PMID: 39342930.
BibTeX
@article{henkel2025-39342930,
author = {Henkel, C. and Seibert, S. and Nichols Widmann, C.},
title = {{Current Advances in Computerized Cognitive Assessment for Mild Cognitive Impairment and Dementia in Older Adults: A Systematic Review}},
journal = {Dementia and geriatric cognitive disorders},
year = {2025},
doi = {10.1159/000541627},
pmid = {39342930},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1159/000541627}
}
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
- Results The subjects included in the studies were aged 55-77 years.
- The overall gender distribution comprised 60% females and 40% males.
- Convergent validity assessments in 20 studies demonstrated strong positive correlations with traditional tests.
- Overall classification accuracy in detecting MCI or dementia, distinguishing from normal cognition (NC), reached up to 91%.
Study details
- Evidence strengthLow
How this study scored 62/100
Published in a peer-reviewed journal, and it is a systematic review of all the studies on the question. Scored zero for sample size, effect reported and studied in people 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 36 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 62 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 7 / 10 | Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Dementia and geriatric cognitive disorders) |
| Journal's citation record | — / 4 | No journal record from OpenAlex — left out of this score |
| Study design | 12 / 12 | A systematic review of all the studies on the question (from PubMed type “Systematic Review”) |
| Strength of evidence | 1 / 5 | Rated “low” 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 | 0 / 4 | Participant count not stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Effect reported | 0 / 3 | No effect size reported — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Studied in people | 0 / 3 | Not stated whether this was studied in people — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Randomised / blinded | 0 / 2 | A review of other studies — randomisation is not credited here |
| 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 39342930) |
| Free to read | 0 / 2 | Behind a paywall — scores zero |
| Points | 36 / 58 | Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 36 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 62 out of 100. |
| Total | 62 / 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 “cognitive-assessment”
4 studies in the library carry the topic tag “cognitive-assessment”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 4 tagged studies.