Get help now — free helplines

You can call any of these for free. You do not need a diagnosis, an appointment, or a crisis to call — questions and plain exhaustion are reasons enough.

  • Alzheimer's Association 24/7 Helpline 800-272-3900 24 hours a day, 365 days a year Free, confidential support and information for people with dementia, caregivers, families and the public. Master's-level clinicians. Also Spanish.
  • 988 Suicide & Crisis Lifeline 988 24/7 Call or text 988, or chat at 988lifeline.org. For anyone in emotional distress or a mental-health crisis, including caregivers.
  • Alzheimer's Foundation of America (AFA) Helpline 866-232-8484 9:00 am - 9:00 pm ET, seven days a week Licensed social workers providing support, info and referrals. Also text message and web chat. Text: 646-586-5283

In a medical emergency, call 911. More numbers, and what each line does, on the help page.

This page is alzhub.org's plain-English summary of a published study, not the paper itself. It is generated from the record we hold for this study, sourced and linked below — check the original for the full text and methods.

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 59 out of 100. Cognitive tests and assessment

Topic: Brain imaging, connectivity and assessment

Access to affordable, objective and scalable biomarkers of brain function is needed to transform the healthcare burden of neuropsychiatric and neurodegenerative disease. Electroencephalography (EEG) recordings, both resting and in combination with targeted cognitive tasks, have demonstrated utility in tracking disease state and therapy response in a range of conditions from schizophrenia to Alzheimer's disease. But conventional methods of recording this data involve burdensome clinic visits, and behavioural tasks that are not effective in frequent repeated use. This paper aims to evaluate the technical and human-factors feasibility of gathering large-scale EEG using novel technology in the home environment with healthy adult users. In a large field study, 89 healthy adults aged 40-79 years volunteered to use the system at home for 12 weeks, 5 times/week, for 30 min/session. A 16-channel, dry-sensor, portable wireless headset recorded EEG while users played gamified cognitive and passive tasks through a tablet application, including tests of decision making, executive function and memory. Data was uploaded to cloud servers and remotely monitored via web-based dashboards. Seventy-eight participants completed the study, and high levels of adherence were maintained throughout across all age groups, with mean compliance over the 12-week period of 82% (4.1 sessions per week). Reported ease of use was also high with mean System Usability Scale scores of 78.7. Behavioural response measures (reaction time and accuracy) and EEG components elicited by gamified stimuli (P300, ERN, Pe and changes in power spectral density) were extracted from the data collected in home, across a wide range of ages, including older adult participants. Findings replicated well-known patterns of age-related change and demonstrated the feasibility of using low-burden, large-scale, longitudinal EEG measurement in community-based cohorts. This technology enables clinically relevant data to be recorded outside the lab/clinic, from which metrics underlying cognitive ageing could be extracted, opening the door to potential new ways of developing digital cognitive biomarkers for disorders affecting the brain.

Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris

APA 7th

McWilliams, E. C., Barbey, F. M., Dyer, J. F., Islam, M. N., McGuinness, B., Murphy, B., et al. (2021). Feasibility of Repeated Assessment of Cognitive Function in Older Adults Using a Wireless, Mobile, Dry-EEG Headset and Tablet-Based Games. Frontiers in psychiatry. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyt.2021.574482

Vancouver

McWilliams EC, Barbey FM, Dyer JF, Islam MN, McGuinness B, Murphy B, et al. Feasibility of Repeated Assessment of Cognitive Function in Older Adults Using a Wireless, Mobile, Dry-EEG Headset and Tablet-Based Games. Frontiers in psychiatry. 2021. doi:10.3389/fpsyt.2021.574482. PMID: 34276428.

BibTeX

@article{mcwilliams2021-34276428,
  author  = {McWilliams, E. C. and Barbey, F. M. and Dyer, J. F. and Islam, M. N. and McGuinness, B. and Murphy, B. and Nolan, H. and Passmore, P. and others},
  title   = {{Feasibility of Repeated Assessment of Cognitive Function in Older Adults Using a Wireless, Mobile, Dry-EEG Headset and Tablet-Based Games}},
  journal = {Frontiers in psychiatry},
  year    = {2021},
  doi     = {10.3389/fpsyt.2021.574482},
  pmid    = {34276428},
  url     = {https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyt.2021.574482}
}

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

Study details

How this study scored 59/100
How this study's score is builtJournal tier 7 of 10; Journal's citation record left out, no data; Study design 7 of 12; Strength of evidence 3 of 5; Peer-review validation 10 of 10; How recent 3 of 5; Sample size 0 of 4; Effect reported 0 of 3; Studied in people 0 of 3; Randomised / blinded 0 of 2; Times cited left out, no data; Citations per year left out, no data; Impact for its field and year left out, no data; Cited by studies here left out, no data; Still being cited left out, no data; Senior author's track record left out, no data; Institution's track record left out, no data; Multi-centre collaboration left out, no data; Indexed in PubMed 2 of 2; Free to read 2 of 2. 34 of the 58 points it could be judged on, which is 59 of 100. Total 59 of 100.34 of the 58 points we could judge = 59 of 100

Published in a peer-reviewed journal, and it is a longitudinal study following the same 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 34 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 59 out of 100.

ComponentPointsWhy
Journal tier 7 / 10 Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Frontiers in psychiatry)
Journal's citation record — / 4 No journal record from OpenAlex — left out of this score
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 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 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 34276428)
Free to read 2 / 2 Free to read
Points 34 / 58 Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 34 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 59 out of 100.
Total 59 / 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.

Studies in the library that share something with this one. The line above each title says what.

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.

Studies sharing this one's topic tags

Similar studies

More on Cognitive tests and assessment

See all studies in Cognitive tests and assessment →