Home › Research › Cognitive tests and assessment
Identifying older adults at risk for dementia based on smartphone data obtained during a wayfinding task in the real world
Marquardt J, Mohan P, Spiliopoulou M, Glanz W, Butryn M, Kuehn E, Schreiber S, Maass A et al.. PLOS digital health, 2024-10-03
Topic: Risk, prevention and care in population studies
Alzheimer's disease (AD), as the most common form of dementia and leading cause for disability and death in old age, represents a major burden to healthcare systems worldwide. For the development of disease-modifying interventions and treatments, the detection of cognitive changes at the earliest disease stages is crucial. Recent advancements in mobile consumer technologies provide new opportunities to collect multi-dimensional data in real-life settings to identify and monitor at-risk individuals. Based on evidence showing that deficits in spatial navigation are a common hallmark of dementia, we assessed whether a memory clinic sample of patients with subjective cognitive decline (SCD) who still scored normally on neuropsychological assessments show differences in smartphone-assisted wayfinding behavior compared with cognitively healthy older and younger adults. Guided by a mobile application, participants had to find locations along a short route on the medical campus of the Magdeburg university. We show that performance measures that were extracted from GPS and user input data distinguish between the groups. In particular, the number of orientation stops was predictive of the SCD status in older participants. Our data suggest that subtle cognitive changes in patients with SCD, whose risk to develop dementia in the future is elevated, can be inferred from smartphone data, collected during a brief wayfinding task in the real world.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Marquardt, J., Mohan, P., Spiliopoulou, M., Glanz, W., Butryn, M., Kuehn, E., et al. (2024). Identifying older adults at risk for dementia based on smartphone data obtained during a wayfinding task in the real world. PLOS digital health. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pdig.0000613
Vancouver
Marquardt J, Mohan P, Spiliopoulou M, Glanz W, Butryn M, Kuehn E, et al. Identifying older adults at risk for dementia based on smartphone data obtained during a wayfinding task in the real world. PLOS digital health. 2024. doi:10.1371/journal.pdig.0000613. PMID: 39361552.
BibTeX
@article{marquardt2024-39361552,
author = {Marquardt, J. and Mohan, P. and Spiliopoulou, M. and Glanz, W. and Butryn, M. and Kuehn, E. and Schreiber, S. and Maass, A. and others},
title = {{Identifying older adults at risk for dementia based on smartphone data obtained during a wayfinding task in the real world}},
journal = {PLOS digital health},
year = {2024},
doi = {10.1371/journal.pdig.0000613},
pmid = {39361552},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pdig.0000613}
}
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
- Based on evidence showing that deficits in spatial navigation are a common hallmark of dementia, we assessed whether a memory clinic sample of patients with subjective cognitive decline (SCD) who still scored normally on neuropsychological assessments show differences in smartphone-assisted wayfinding behavior compared with cognitively healthy older and younger adults.
- Our data suggest that subtle cognitive changes in patients with SCD, whose risk to develop dementia in the future is elevated, can be inferred from smartphone data, collected during a brief wayfinding task in the real world.
Study details
- Evidence strengthLow
How this study scored 45/100
Published in a peer-reviewed journal. Scored zero for study design, 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 26 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 45 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 7 / 10 | Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (PLOS digital health) |
| 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 | 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 39361552) |
| Free to read | 2 / 2 | Free to read |
| Points | 26 / 58 | Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 26 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 45 out of 100. |
| Total | 45 / 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 “identifying”
3 studies in the library carry the topic tag “identifying”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 3 tagged studies.