Home › Research › Cognitive tests and assessment
Digital phenotyping: An equal opportunity approach to reducing disparities in Alzheimer's disease and related dementia research
Britton GB, Huang LK, Villarreal AE, Levey A, Philippakis A, Hu CJ, Yang CC, Mushi D et al.. Alzheimer's & dementia (Amsterdam, Netherlands), 2023-10-01
Topic: Amyloid, tau and blood-test diagnosis
A rapidly aging world population is fueling a concomitant increase in Alzheimer's disease (AD) and related dementias (ADRD). Scientific inquiry, however, has largely focused on White populations in Australia, the European Union, and North America. As such, there is an incomplete understanding of AD in other populations. In this perspective, we describe research efforts and challenges of cohort studies from three regions of the world: Central America, East Africa, and East Asia. These cohorts are engaging with the Davos Alzheimer's Collaborative (DAC), a global partnership that brings together cohorts from around the world to advance understanding of AD. Each cohort is poised to leverage the widespread use of mobile devices to integrate digital phenotyping into current methodologies and mitigate the lack of representativeness in AD research of racial and ethnic minorities across the globe. In addition to methods that these three cohorts are already using, DAC has developed a digital phenotyping protocol that can collect ADRD-related data remotely via smartphone and/or in clinic via a tablet to generate a common data elements digital dataset that can be harmonized with additional clinical and molecular data being collected at each cohort site and when combined across cohorts and made accessible can provide a global data resource that is more racially/ethnically represented of the world population.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Britton, G. B., Huang, L. K., Villarreal, A. E., Levey, A., Philippakis, A., Hu, C. J., et al. (2023). Digital phenotyping: An equal opportunity approach to reducing disparities in Alzheimer's disease and related dementia research. Alzheimer's & dementia (Amsterdam, Netherlands). https://doi.org/10.1002/dad2.12495
Vancouver
Britton GB, Huang LK, Villarreal AE, Levey A, Philippakis A, Hu CJ, et al. Digital phenotyping: An equal opportunity approach to reducing disparities in Alzheimer's disease and related dementia research. Alzheimer's & dementia (Amsterdam, Netherlands). 2023. doi:10.1002/dad2.12495. PMID: 38034851.
BibTeX
@article{britton2023-38034851,
author = {Britton, G. B. and Huang, L. K. and Villarreal, A. E. and Levey, A. and Philippakis, A. and Hu, C. J. and Yang, C. C. and Mushi, D. and others},
title = {{Digital phenotyping: An equal opportunity approach to reducing disparities in Alzheimer's disease and related dementia research}},
journal = {Alzheimer's \& dementia (Amsterdam, Netherlands)},
year = {2023},
doi = {10.1002/dad2.12495},
pmid = {38034851},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1002/dad2.12495}
}
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.
Key findings
- As such, there is an incomplete understanding of AD in other populations.
- In this perspective, we describe research efforts and challenges of cohort studies from three regions of the world: Central America, East Africa, and East Asia.
- These cohorts are engaging with the Davos Alzheimer's Collaborative (DAC), a global partnership that brings together cohorts from around the world to advance understanding of AD.
- Each cohort is poised to leverage the widespread use of mobile devices to integrate digital phenotyping into current methodologies and mitigate the lack of representativeness in AD research of racial and ethnic minorities across the globe.
- In addition to methods that these three cohorts are already using, DAC has developed a digital phenotyping protocol that can collect ADRD-related data remotely via smartphone and/or in clinic via a tablet to generate a common data elements digital dataset that can be harmonized with additional clinical and molecular data being collected at each cohort site and when combined across cohorts and made accessible can provide a global data resource that is more racially/ethnically represented of the world population.
Study details
- Study designcohort study
- Evidence strengthModerate
How this study scored 62/100
Published in a leading specialty journal, and it is a cohort study following people over time. Scored zero for sample size, effect reported, studied in people 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 36 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 62 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 9 / 10 | Tier 2 — leading specialty journal (Alzheimer's & dementia (Amsterdam, Netherlands)) |
| Journal's citation record | — / 4 | No journal record from OpenAlex — left out of this score |
| Study design | 7 / 12 | A cohort study following 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 | 2023 — within 6 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 | 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 38034851) |
| Free to read | 2 / 2 | Free to read |
| 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.