Home › Research › Cognitive tests and assessment
Dual-task turn velocity - a novel digital biomarker for mild cognitive impairment and dementia
Jing Wang, Zheping Zhou, Shanshan Cheng, Li Zhou, Xiaoou Sun, Ziyang Song, Zhiwei Wu, Jinhua Lu et al.. Frontiers in aging neuroscience, 2024-02-27
Topic: Brain imaging, connectivity and assessment
Our results demonstrated that dual-task could significantly improve the ability to predict cognitive impairment based on gait parameters such as gait speed (GS) and stride length (SL). Additionally, we discovered that turn velocity (TV and DT-TV) can be a valuable novel digital marker for predicting MCI and dementia, for identifying MCI (DT-TV: AUC = 0.801, sensitivity 0.738, specificity 0.842), and dementia (DT-TV: AUC = 0.923, sensitivity 0.857, specificity 0.842). The correlation analysis and linear regression analysis revealed a robust association between DT-TV and memory function, as well as the hippocampus atrophy. This study presents a novel finding that DT-TV could accurately identify varying degrees of cognitive impairment. DT-TV is strongly correlated with memory function and hippocampus shrinkage, suggests that it can accurately reflect changes in cognitive function. Therefore, DT-TV could serve as a novel and effective digital biomarker for discriminating cognitive impairment.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Wang, J., Zhou, Z., Cheng, S., Zhou, L., Sun, X., Song, Z., et al. (2024). Dual-task turn velocity - a novel digital biomarker for mild cognitive impairment and dementia. Frontiers in aging neuroscience. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnagi.2024.1304265
Vancouver
Wang J, Zhou Z, Cheng S, Zhou L, Sun X, Song Z, et al. Dual-task turn velocity - a novel digital biomarker for mild cognitive impairment and dementia. Frontiers in aging neuroscience. 2024. doi:10.3389/fnagi.2024.1304265. PMID: 38476660.
BibTeX
@article{wang2024-38476660,
author = {Wang, Jing and Zhou, Zheping and Cheng, Shanshan and Zhou, Li and Sun, Xiaoou and Song, Ziyang and Wu, Zhiwei and Lu, Jinhua and others},
title = {{Dual-task turn velocity - a novel digital biomarker for mild cognitive impairment and dementia}},
journal = {Frontiers in aging neuroscience},
year = {2024},
doi = {10.3389/fnagi.2024.1304265},
pmid = {38476660},
url = {https://doi.org/10.3389/fnagi.2024.1304265}
}
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
- Our results demonstrated that dual-task could significantly improve the ability to predict cognitive impairment based on gait parameters such as gait speed (GS) and stride length (SL).
- Additionally, we discovered that turn velocity (TV and DT-TV) can be a valuable novel digital marker for predicting MCI and dementia, for identifying MCI (DT-TV: AUC = 0.801, sensitivity 0.738, specificity 0.842), and dementia (DT-TV: AUC = 0.923, sensitivity 0.857, specificity 0.842).
- The correlation analysis and linear regression analysis revealed a robust association between DT-TV and memory function, as well as the hippocampus atrophy.
- This study presents a novel finding that DT-TV could accurately identify varying degrees of cognitive impairment.
- DT-TV is strongly correlated with memory function and hippocampus shrinkage, suggests that it can accurately reflect changes in cognitive function.
Study details
- Participants38
- Effect sizeAUC = 0.801; AUC = 0.923
- Evidence strengthLow
How this study scored 55/100
Published in a peer-reviewed journal. Scored zero for study design 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 31 of the 56 points we could judge it on, which is 55 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 7 / 10 | Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Frontiers in aging neuroscience) |
| Journal's citation record | — / 4 | No journal record from OpenAlex — left out of this score |
| 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 | 4 / 5 | 2024 — within 3 year(s) of the newest study here |
| Sample size | 1 / 4 | 38 participants |
| Effect reported | 3 / 3 | Effect reported with a statistic (interval, p-value, ratio or similar) |
| 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 38476660) |
| Free to read | — / 2 | Access not recorded — left out of this score |
| Points | 31 / 56 | Scored on 10 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 31 of the 56 points we could judge it on is 55 out of 100. |
| Total | 55 / 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.