Home › Research › Treatments
Feasibility of remote self-administered cognitive assessment in an Alzheimer's disease treatment clinic
Kaser, A. N.; Stricker, J. L.; Hughes, M. A.; Corriveau-Lecavalier, N.; Boots, E. A.; Machulda, M. M.; Fields, J. A.; Jones et al.. medRxiv (preprint), 2026-09-16
Topic: Risk, prevention and care in population studies
IntroductionRemote cognitive assessments offer an accessible, scalable way to support clinical characterization and longitudinal monitoring of cognition. This study evaluates the feasibility of implementing Mayo Test Drive (MTD), a remote, self-administered digital cognitive assessment, within a specialized clinic focused on eligibility assessments for anti-amyloid therapies for Alzheimers disease (AD). MethodTwo-hundred and nine (N=209) patients (Mage=71.2, 53% female) were evaluated through the Mayo Clinic Rochester Alzheimers Disease Treatment Clinic (ADTC) and had the opportunity to complete MTD, either as a remote, patient-initiated session through a patient-facing healthcare portal or during an in-clinic neuropsychological evaluation. ResultsClinical diagnoses included 55.2% mild cognitive impairment (MCI), 31.0% mild dementia, and 11.6% moderate dementia, in addition to 2.2% cognitively unimpaired (CU), as determined by neurology consensus at a multidisciplinary case conference. Among those who initiated MTD (n=197/209), 97.5% completed a session (70.6% remotely, 26.9% in clinic). Completion rates were high across diagnostic groups and did not significantly differ by clinical severity (p=.12): CU (100%), MCI (99.1%), mild dementia (97.0%), and moderate dementia (89.5%). Remote completion rates overall were high (97.9%). Among completers, administration setting (remote vs. in-clinic) did not significantly differ by clinical stage, {chi}{superscript 2}(3)=2.37, p=.49. Reasons for non-initiation included not receiving or opening portal messages and other/unknown factors. DiscussionRemote digital cognitive assessment is feasible within the context of clinic eligibility evaluations for AD therapies. The high completion rates of MTD across clinical impairment levels in this setting support development of paths for broader use in cognitive characterization in AD care.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Kaser, A. N., Stricker, J. L., Hughes, M. A., Corriveau-Lecavalier, N., Boots, E. A., Machulda, M. M., et al. (2026). Feasibility of remote self-administered cognitive assessment in an Alzheimer's disease treatment clinic. medRxiv (preprint). https://doi.org/10.64898/2026.09.15.26362283
Vancouver
Kaser AN, Stricker JL, Hughes MA, Corriveau-Lecavalier N, Boots EA, Machulda MM, et al. Feasibility of remote self-administered cognitive assessment in an Alzheimer's disease treatment clinic. medRxiv (preprint). 2026. doi:10.64898/2026.09.15.26362283.
BibTeX
@article{kaser2026-ef6b37b4,
author = {Kaser, A. N. and Stricker, J. L. and Hughes, M. A. and Corriveau-Lecavalier, N. and Boots, E. A. and Machulda, M. M. and Fields, J. A. and Jones and others},
title = {{Feasibility of remote self-administered cognitive assessment in an Alzheimer's disease treatment clinic}},
journal = {medRxiv (preprint)},
year = {2026},
doi = {10.64898/2026.09.15.26362283},
url = {https://doi.org/10.64898/2026.09.15.26362283}
}
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
- Completion rates were high across diagnostic groups and did not significantly differ by clinical severity (p=.12): CU (100%), MCI (99.1%), mild dementia (97.0%), and moderate dementia (89.5%).
- Remote completion rates overall were high (97.9%).
- Among completers, administration setting (remote vs. in-clinic) did not significantly differ by clinical stage, {chi}{superscript 2}(3)=2.37, p=.49.
Why it matters
This study found that a remote, self-administered cognitive test was completed by most patients in an Alzheimer's treatment clinic, including those with moderate dementia. It shows the test is feasible to use, but it does not test any treatment or show whether remote testing improves patient outcomes.
New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Treatments →
Study details
- Study designlongitudinal study
- Participants209
- Effect size55.2%; 31.0%; 11.6%
- Evidence strengthModerate
How this study scored 16/100
Preprint — not yet peer-reviewed. It scored 37 on the same rubric, but non-peer-reviewed sources are capped at 16, so it shows as 16. Scored zero for randomised / blinded because the record does not state it. We have no data on impact for its field and year, so that was left out: it earned 35 of the 94 points we could judge it on, which is 37 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 2 / 10 | Tier 4 — not a peer-reviewed journal (medRxiv (preprint)) |
| Journal's citation record | 0 / 4 | Not a journal article, so the journal's record does not count |
| Study design | 7 / 12 | A longitudinal study following the same people over time |
| Strength of evidence | 3 / 5 | Rated “moderate” in our summary |
| Peer-review validation | 4 / 10 | Preprint — not yet peer-reviewed. Hosted on a preprint server. |
| How recent | 5 / 5 | 2026 — within 1 year(s) of the newest study here |
| Sample size | 2 / 4 | 209 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 | 0 / 7 | Cited 0 times (OpenAlex, 2026-10-10) |
| Citations per year | 0 / 5 | 0.0 citations a year over 2 year(s) since 2026 |
| 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 | 0 / 6 | No other study in this library cites it |
| Still being cited | 0 / 4 | Cited 0 times in 2024–2026 (2026 still in progress; OpenAlex) |
| Senior author's track record | 2 / 4 | Last-listed author Nikki H. Stricker: h-index 27 (OpenAlex, whole career) |
| Institution's track record | 2 / 3 | Mayo Clinic: institution h-index 1,606 (OpenAlex) |
| Multi-centre collaboration | 0 / 3 | OpenAlex lists 1 institution(s) in 1 country — scores zero (affiliation lists can be incomplete) |
| Indexed in PubMed | 1 / 2 | Not in PubMed, but has a DOI |
| Free to read | 2 / 2 | Free to read |
| Points | 35 / 94 | Scored on 19 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 35 of the 94 points we could judge it on is 37 out of 100. |
| Total | 37 / 100 | Capped to 16 because this is not a peer-reviewed article. |
What each of these 20 components measures, and what this score is not →
Read the original
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.
Related studies in Treatments
Also tagged “examination”
840 studies in the library carry the topic tag “examination”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 840 tagged studies.