Home › Research › Cognitive tests and assessment
Predicting CDR status over 36 months with a recall-based digital cognitive biomarker
Davide Bruno, Ainara Jauregi-Zinkunegi, Jason R Bock, Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative. Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association, 2024-09-11
Topic: Brain imaging, connectivity and assessment
The best predictor of CDR at 36 months was M, a DCB reflecting recall ability (area under the curve = 0.84), outperforming traditional scores. Diagnostic results suggest that M may be particularly useful to identify individuals who are unlikely to decline. These results suggest that M outperforms ADAS-Cog traditional metrics and supports process scoring for word-list recall tests. More research is needed to determine further applicability with other tests and populations. HIGHLIGHTS: Process scoring and latent modeling were more effective than traditional scoring. Latent recall ability (M) was the best predictor of Clinical Dementia Rating decline at 36 months. The top digital cognitive biomarker model had odds ≈ 90 times greater than the top Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale-Cognitive subscale model. Particularly high negative predictive value supports literature on cognitive testing as a useful screen. Consideration of both cognitive and pathological outcomes is needed.
Key findings
- The best predictor of CDR at 36 months was M, a DCB reflecting recall ability (area under the curve = 0.84), outperforming traditional scores.
- Diagnostic results suggest that M may be particularly useful to identify individuals who are unlikely to decline.
- These results suggest that M outperforms ADAS-Cog traditional metrics and supports process scoring for word-list recall tests.
- More research is needed to determine further applicability with other tests and populations.
- HIGHLIGHTS: Process scoring and latent modeling were more effective than traditional scoring.
Study details
- Participants330
- Evidence strengthLow
How this study scored 55/100
Published in a leading specialty journal. Scored zero for study design, 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, 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 | 9 / 10 | Tier 2 — leading specialty journal (Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association) |
| 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 | 2 / 4 | 330 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 39258756) |
| 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.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
Built from the record alzhub holds for this paper, not looked up. Volume, issue and page numbers are not held in the record. Check the citation against the original before you use it.
APA 7th
Bruno, D., Jauregi-Zinkunegi, A., Bock, J. R., & Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative. (2024). Predicting CDR status over 36 months with a recall-based digital cognitive biomarker. Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association. https://doi.org/10.1002/alz.14213
Vancouver
Bruno D, Jauregi-Zinkunegi A, Bock JR, Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative. Predicting CDR status over 36 months with a recall-based digital cognitive biomarker. Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association. 2024. doi:10.1002/alz.14213. PMID: 39258756.
BibTeX
@article{bruno2024-39258756,
author = {Bruno, Davide and Jauregi-Zinkunegi, Ainara and Bock, Jason R and {Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative}},
title = {{Predicting CDR status over 36 months with a recall-based digital cognitive biomarker}},
journal = {Alzheimer's \& dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association},
year = {2024},
doi = {10.1002/alz.14213},
pmid = {39258756},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1002/alz.14213}
}
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.