Home › Research › Cognitive tests and assessment
Digitization of neuropsychological diagnostics: a pilot study to compare three paper-based and digitized cognitive assessments
Antje Latendorf, Lina Marie Runde, Tiina Salminen, Anika Steinert. Aging clinical and experimental research, 2020-10-01
Topic: Brain imaging, connectivity and assessment
Between the two versions (paper-based vs. digital) statistically significant correlations were found in all tests, e.g., TMT-A r(48) = 0.63, p < 0.01; TMT-B rs(48) = 0.77, p < 0.001). The mean value comparison showed statistically significant differences, e.g., interference table (CWIT) t(49) = 11.24, p < 0.01). Correlations with medium effect were found between the differences in processing times and the individual usage of computer (e.g., rs(48) = - 0.31) and smartphone (rs(48) = - 0.29) and between the processing times of the TMT-B and the usability (rs(48) = 0.29). The high correlations between the test procedures appear promising. However, the differences found in the processing times of the two test versions require validation and standardization of digitized test procedures before they can be used in practice.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Latendorf, A., Runde, L. M., Salminen, T., & Steinert, A. (2021). Digitization of neuropsychological diagnostics: a pilot study to compare three paper-based and digitized cognitive assessments. Aging clinical and experimental research. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40520-020-01668-z
Vancouver
Latendorf A, Runde LM, Salminen T, Steinert A. Digitization of neuropsychological diagnostics: a pilot study to compare three paper-based and digitized cognitive assessments. Aging clinical and experimental research. 2021. doi:10.1007/s40520-020-01668-z. PMID: 33001402.
BibTeX
@article{latendorf2021-33001402,
author = {Latendorf, Antje and Runde, Lina Marie and Salminen, Tiina and Steinert, Anika},
title = {{Digitization of neuropsychological diagnostics: a pilot study to compare three paper-based and digitized cognitive assessments}},
journal = {Aging clinical and experimental research},
year = {2021},
doi = {10.1007/s40520-020-01668-z},
pmid = {33001402},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1007/s40520-020-01668-z}
}
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
- Between the two versions (paper-based vs. digital) statistically significant correlations were found in all tests, e.g., TMT-A r(48) = 0.63, p < 0.01; TMT-B rs(48) = 0.77, p < 0.001).
- The mean value comparison showed statistically significant differences, e.g., interference table (CWIT) t(49) = 11.24, p < 0.01).
- Correlations with medium effect were found between the differences in processing times and the individual usage of computer (e.g., rs(48) = - 0.31) and smartphone (rs(48) = - 0.29) and between the processing times of the TMT-B and the usability (rs(48) = 0.29).
- The high correlations between the test procedures appear promising.
- However, the differences found in the processing times of the two test versions require validation and standardization of digitized test procedures before they can be used in practice.
Study details
- Evidence strengthHigh
How this study scored 75/100
Published in a peer-reviewed journal, and it is a randomised controlled trial. Scored zero for sample size and effect reported 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 42 of the 56 points we could judge it on, which is 75 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 7 / 10 | Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Aging clinical and experimental research) |
| Journal's citation record | — / 4 | No journal record from OpenAlex — left out of this score |
| Study design | 11 / 12 | A randomised controlled trial (from PubMed type “Randomized Controlled Trial”) |
| Strength of evidence | 5 / 5 | Rated “high” in our summary |
| Peer-review validation | 10 / 10 | Peer-reviewed. Published as an article in a named peer-reviewed journal. |
| How recent | 3 / 5 | 2021 — 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 | 3 / 3 | Studied in people (pubmed indexes it as a clinical or observational study) |
| Randomised / blinded | 1 / 2 | Randomised (as stated in the record) |
| 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 33001402) |
| Free to read | — / 2 | Access not recorded — left out of this score |
| Points | 42 / 56 | Scored on 10 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 42 of the 56 points we could judge it on is 75 out of 100. |
| Total | 75 / 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.