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.

⚠ Preprint — not yet peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 16 out of 100. Digital health tools

Topic: Brain proteins, microglia and lab models

IntroductionFrontotemporal lobar degeneration (FTLD) is a devastating disease that commonly results in early onset dementia, yet its rarity and heterogeneity limit large-scale research and clinical trials. Remote monitoring via low-burden digital health tools may overcome these barriers. We evaluated clinical utility of passive smartphone monitoring in FTLD using a multi-domain mobile assessment platform. MethodsParticipants were 567 adults (53% clinically normal, 21% prodromal FTLD, 26% symptomatic FTLD) who completed an in-person study visit and downloaded the ALLFTD Mobile App on their personal smartphones. The app delivered unsupervised cognitive tests and passively collected continuous data on battery percentage (proxy for smartphone use) and step count. Longitudinal follow-up included smartphone monitoring and annual in-person study visits. Primary analyses examined associations between passive smartphone features and markers of disease severity at baseline and longitudinally, and tested whether passive features added incremental value beyond app-based cognitive testing. ResultsPassive smartphone features were feasible to collect and showed excellent reliability with 0.9). Features capturing smartphone use and movement demonstrated sensitivity to gold-standard clinical measures of disease severity both at baseline and longitudinally. A classification model combining passive features, the app-based cognitive composite score, and demographics detected longitudinal functional decline (AUC=0.89); passive features alone (AUC=0.84) performed comparably to a cognitive screener (AUC=0.85). DiscussionPassive smartphone monitoring is a valid, zero-burden measure of disease severity and progression in FTLD that adds modest incremental value beyond app-based cognitive testing. Findings support its use as a scalable digital endpoint in longitudinal FTLD research.

Key findings

Why it matters

This study found that passive smartphone data, such as step count and battery use, was feasible to collect and reflected disease severity in people with frontotemporal lobar degeneration. It is early work on remote monitoring tools and does not test any treatment.

Study details

How this study scored 16/100
How this study's score is builtJournal tier 2 of 10; Journal's citation record 0 of 4; Study design 7 of 12; Strength of evidence 3 of 5; Peer-review validation 4 of 10; How recent 5 of 5; Sample size 2 of 4; Effect reported 3 of 3; Studied in people 3 of 3; Randomised / blinded 0 of 2; Times cited 0 of 7; Citations per year 0 of 5; Impact for its field and year left out, no data; Cited by studies here 0 of 6; Still being cited 0 of 4; Senior author's track record 2 of 4; Institution's track record 3 of 3; Multi-centre collaboration 3 of 3; Indexed in PubMed 1 of 2; Free to read 2 of 2. 40 of the 94 points it could be judged on, which is 43 of 100. Raw total 43 of 100, shown as 16 because this is not a peer-reviewed research article.raw total 43 of 100capped at 16 — hatched points do not count

Preprint — not yet peer-reviewed. It scored 43 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 40 of the 94 points we could judge it on, which is 43 out of 100.

ComponentPointsWhy
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 / 4 567 participants
Effect reported 3 / 3 Effect reported with a statistic (interval, p-value, ratio or similar)
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 Adam M. Staffaroni: h-index 38 (OpenAlex, whole career)
Institution's track record 3 / 3 Harvard University: institution h-index 3,235 (OpenAlex)
Multi-centre collaboration 3 / 3 OpenAlex lists 21 institution(s) in 2 countries
Indexed in PubMed 1 / 2 Not in PubMed, but has a DOI
Free to read 2 / 2 Free to read
Points 40 / 94 Scored on 19 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 40 of the 94 points we could judge it on is 43 out of 100.
Total 43 / 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).

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. 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.

APA 7th

Paolillo, E. W., Dhanam, S., Taylor, J. C., Sanderson-Cimino, M., Fregly, R., Saloner, R., et al. (2026). Smartphone Passive Digital Phenotyping in Frontotemporal Lobar Degeneration. medRxiv (preprint). https://doi.org/10.64898/2026.09.18.26363439

Vancouver

Paolillo EW, Dhanam S, Taylor JC, Sanderson-Cimino M, Fregly R, Saloner R, et al. Smartphone Passive Digital Phenotyping in Frontotemporal Lobar Degeneration. medRxiv (preprint). 2026. doi:10.64898/2026.09.18.26363439.

BibTeX

@article{paolillo2026-7ef6cdb9,
  author  = {Paolillo, E. W. and Dhanam, S. and Taylor, J. C. and Sanderson-Cimino, M. and Fregly, R. and Saloner, R. and Casaletto, K. B. and Kramer and others},
  title   = {{Smartphone Passive Digital Phenotyping in Frontotemporal Lobar Degeneration}},
  journal = {medRxiv (preprint)},
  year    = {2026},
  doi     = {10.64898/2026.09.18.26363439},
  url     = {https://doi.org/10.64898/2026.09.18.26363439}
}

Studies this one cites

Referenced by this study and also in the alzhub library, so you can read them here.

Related studies in Digital health tools

Also tagged “bodies”

1,017 studies in the library carry the topic tag “bodies”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 1,017 tagged studies.

Similar studies

More on Digital health tools

See all studies in Digital health tools →