Home › Research › Digital health tools
Diagnostic value of digital clock drawing test in comparison with CERAD neuropsychological battery total score for discrimination of patients in the early course of Alzheimer's disease from healthy individuals
Müller S, Herde L, Preische O, Zeller A, Heymann P, Robens S, Elbing U, Laske C.. Scientific reports, 2019-03-05
Topic: Amyloid, tau and blood-test diagnosis
Our findings suggest that dCDT is a suitable screening tool to identify early cognitive dysfunction.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Müller, S., Herde, L., Preische, O., Zeller, A., Heymann, P., Robens, S., et al. (2019). Diagnostic value of digital clock drawing test in comparison with CERAD neuropsychological battery total score for discrimination of patients in the early course of Alzheimer's disease from healthy individuals. Scientific reports. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-019-40010-0
Vancouver
Müller S, Herde L, Preische O, Zeller A, Heymann P, Robens S, et al. Diagnostic value of digital clock drawing test in comparison with CERAD neuropsychological battery total score for discrimination of patients in the early course of Alzheimer's disease from healthy individuals. Scientific reports. 2019. doi:10.1038/s41598-019-40010-0. PMID: 30837580.
BibTeX
@article{muller2019-30837580,
author = {Müller, S. and Herde, L. and Preische, O. and Zeller, A. and Heymann, P. and Robens, S. and Elbing, U. and Laske, C.},
title = {{Diagnostic value of digital clock drawing test in comparison with CERAD neuropsychological battery total score for discrimination of patients in the early course of Alzheimer's disease from healthy individuals}},
journal = {Scientific reports},
year = {2019},
doi = {10.1038/s41598-019-40010-0},
pmid = {30837580},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-019-40010-0}
}
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 names 8 authors; APA and Vancouver show the first six, BibTeX and the downloads carry all of them. Check the citation against the original before you use it.
Key findings
- Our findings suggest that dCDT is a suitable screening tool to identify early cognitive dysfunction.
Why it matters
The digital clock drawing test was found to be a suitable screening tool to identify early cognitive dysfunction. This suggests it could help detect Alzheimer's disease in its early course, though the study design is not stated.
New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Digital health →
Study details
- Participants381
- Effect size81.5%; 77.5%; 78.0%
- Evidence strengthLow
How this study scored 54/100
Published in a peer-reviewed journal. Scored zero for study design and randomised / blinded because the record does not state it.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 7 / 10 | Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Scientific reports) |
| Journal's citation record | 3 / 4 | Scientific Reports: journal h-index 463 (OpenAlex, 2026-10-29) |
| Study design | 0 / 12 | No study design recorded — scores zero, not guessed (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| 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 | 2 / 5 | 2019 — within 10 year(s) of the newest study here |
| Sample size | 2 / 4 | 381 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) |
| Randomised / blinded | 0 / 2 | No randomisation or blinding stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Times cited | 4 / 7 | Cited 84 times (OpenAlex, 2026-10-10) |
| Citations per year | 3 / 5 | 9.3 citations a year over 9 year(s) since 2019 |
| Impact for its field and year | 3 / 6 | Cited 6.9× the average for papers of its field and year (OpenAlex FWCI) |
| Cited by studies here | 2 / 6 | Cited by 7 other studies in this library |
| Still being cited | 2 / 4 | Cited 39 times in 2024–2026 (2026 still in progress; OpenAlex) |
| Senior author's track record | 3 / 4 | Last-listed author Christoph Laske: h-index 58 (OpenAlex, whole career) |
| Institution's track record | 1 / 3 | University of Tübingen: institution h-index 940 (OpenAlex) |
| Multi-centre collaboration | 2 / 3 | OpenAlex lists 5 institution(s) in 1 country |
| Indexed in PubMed | 2 / 2 | Indexed in PubMed (PMID 30837580) |
| Free to read | 2 / 2 | Free to read |
| Total | 54 / 100 | — |
What each of these 20 components measures, and what this score is not →
Read the original
- DOI: 10.1038/s41598-019-40010-0
- PubMed: 30837580
- Original source →
- Free full text: Scientific Reports →
Full text: free to read — OpenAlex lists this copy as free to read: the link above (checked 6 Feb 1020).
Studies this one cites
Referenced by this study and also in the alzhub library, so you can read them here. Showing 12 of 16.
Later studies that cite this one
7 studies in the alzhub library list this one in their references.
Related studies in Digital health tools
Also tagged “classification”
835 studies in the library carry the topic tag “classification”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 835 tagged studies.