Home › Research › Cognitive tests and assessment
Feasibility and Determinants of Performance for a Tablet-Based Cognitive Assessment Tool in Rural and Urban Southeast Nigeria
Ogbuagu C, Ogbuagu E, Emelumadu O, Okereke U, Okeke I, Chigbo G, Javendal S, Miller B et al.. Journal of Alzheimer's disease : JAD, 2024-01-01
Topic: Risk, prevention and care in population studies
Background Cognitive assessment is a key component of clinical evaluations for patients with dementia and Alzheimer's disease in primary health care (PHC) settings. The need for well-validated, culturally appropriate, and easy-to-use assessments is especially urgent in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) that are experiencing rapid growth in their older adult populations. Objective To examine the feasibility and demographic determinants of performance for a tablet-based cognitive assessment tool (TabCAT) battery, which includes subtests for four cognitive domains, among older PHC patients in southeastNigeria. Methods A cross-sectional mixed-method descriptive study evaluating the useability and performance of TabCAT. Results We enrolled 207 participants (mean age of 64.7±13.5 years; 52% with only primary, 41% secondary, and 7% tertiary education). Most (91%) who initiated the assessment were able to complete it, requiring 10-15 minutes to complete. More years of education was associated with better test scores across all tests (p < 0.001). Living in a rural location was also associated with better performance (p < 0.05). Male compared to female sex did not associate with performance on any of the tests (all ps > 0.05). Conclusions Tablet-based cognitive assessment was feasible in rural and urban settings of Nigeria. Better performance on cognitive subtests linked to more education and residing in a rural area; however, sex did not predict performance. Digital cognitive assessment tools hold potential for widespread use in healthcare and educational contexts, particularly in regions with varying levels of urbanization and educational access.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Ogbuagu, C., Ogbuagu, E., Emelumadu, O., Okereke, U., Okeke, I., Chigbo, G., et al. (2024). Feasibility and Determinants of Performance for a Tablet-Based Cognitive Assessment Tool in Rural and Urban Southeast Nigeria. Journal of Alzheimer's disease : JAD. https://doi.org/10.3233/jad-240518
Vancouver
Ogbuagu C, Ogbuagu E, Emelumadu O, Okereke U, Okeke I, Chigbo G, et al. Feasibility and Determinants of Performance for a Tablet-Based Cognitive Assessment Tool in Rural and Urban Southeast Nigeria. Journal of Alzheimer's disease : JAD. 2024. doi:10.3233/jad-240518. PMID: 39150829.
BibTeX
@article{ogbuagu2024-39150829,
author = {Ogbuagu, C. and Ogbuagu, E. and Emelumadu, O. and Okereke, U. and Okeke, I. and Chigbo, G. and Javendal, S. and Miller, B. and others},
title = {{Feasibility and Determinants of Performance for a Tablet-Based Cognitive Assessment Tool in Rural and Urban Southeast Nigeria}},
journal = {Journal of Alzheimer's disease : JAD},
year = {2024},
doi = {10.3233/jad-240518},
pmid = {39150829},
url = {https://doi.org/10.3233/jad-240518}
}
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
- Results We enrolled 207 participants (mean age of 64.7±13.5 years; 52% with only primary, 41% secondary, and 7% tertiary education).
- More years of education was associated with better test scores across all tests (p < 0.001).
- Living in a rural location was also associated with better performance (p < 0.05).
- Male compared to female sex did not associate with performance on any of the tests (all ps > 0.05).
Study details
- Study designcross-sectional
- Participants207
- Evidence strengthLow
How this study scored 57/100
Published in a peer-reviewed journal, and it is a snapshot of people at one point in time. Scored zero for effect reported 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 33 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 57 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 7 / 10 | Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Journal of Alzheimer's disease : JAD) |
| Journal's citation record | — / 4 | No journal record from OpenAlex — left out of this score |
| Study design | 4 / 12 | A snapshot of people at one point in time |
| 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 | 2 / 4 | 207 participants |
| 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 (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 39150829) |
| Free to read | 0 / 2 | Behind a paywall — scores zero |
| Points | 33 / 58 | Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 33 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 57 out of 100. |
| Total | 57 / 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 in Cognitive tests and assessment
109 studies in the library are filed under Cognitive tests and assessment with no topic tag they share with another; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed tour of them. The Cognitive tests and assessment hub.