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 48 out of 100. Getting a diagnosis

Topic: Risk, prevention and care in population studies

Background Cognitive decline in Alzheimer's disease (AD) often includes speech impairments, where subtle changes may precede clinical dementia onset. As clinical trials focus on early identification of patients for disease-modifying treatments, digital speech-based assessments for scalable screening have become crucial. Objective This study aimed to validate a remote, speech-based digital cognitive assessment for mild cognitive impairment (MCI) detection through the comparison with gold-standard paper-based neurocognitive assessments. Methods Within the PROSPECT-AD project, speech and clinical data were obtained from the German DELCODE and DESCRIBE cohorts, including 21 healthy controls (HC), 110 participants with subjective cognitive decline (SCD), and 59 with MCI. Spearman rank and partial correlations were computed between speech-based scores and clinical measures. Kruskal-Wallis tests assessed group differences. We trained machine learning models to classify diagnostic groups comparing classification accuracies between gold-standard assessment scores and a speech-based digital cognitive assessment composite score (SB-C). Results Global cognition, as measured by SB-C, significantly differed between diagnostic groups ( H (2) = 30.93, p < 0.001). Speech-based scores were significantly correlated with global anchor scores (MMSE, CDR, PACC5). Speech-based composites for memory, executive function and processing speed were also correlated with respective domain-specific paper-based assessments. In logistic regression classification, the model combining SB-C and neuropsychological tests at baseline achieved a high discriminatory power in differentiating HC/SCD from MCI patients (Area Under the Curve = 0.86). Conclusions Our findings support speech-based cognitive assessments as a promising avenue towards remote MCI screening, with implications for scalable screening in clinical trials and healthcare.

Key findings

Why it matters

This study found that speech-based cognitive assessment scores significantly differed between diagnostic groups and were correlated with standard paper-based cognitive tests. The findings support speech-based assessments as a promising avenue for remote screening of mild cognitive impairment.

Study details

How this study scored 48/100
How this study's score is builtJournal tier 7 of 10; Journal's citation record 2 of 4; Study design 0 of 12; Strength of evidence 1 of 5; Peer-review validation 10 of 10; How recent 4 of 5; Sample size 2 of 4; Effect reported 0 of 3; Studied in people 3 of 3; Randomised / blinded 0 of 2; Times cited 2 of 7; Citations per year 2 of 5; Impact for its field and year 3 of 6; Cited by studies here 1 of 6; Still being cited 1 of 4; Senior author's track record 2 of 4; Institution's track record 1 of 3; Multi-centre collaboration 3 of 3; Indexed in PubMed 2 of 2; Free to read 2 of 2. Total 48 of 100.48 of 100 points earned52 not earned

Published in a peer-reviewed journal. Scored zero for study design, effect reported and randomised / blinded because the record does not state it.

ComponentPointsWhy
Journal tier 7 / 10 Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Journal of Alzheimer s Disease)
Journal's citation record 2 / 4 Journal of Alzheimer s Disease: journal h-index 218 (OpenAlex, 2026-10-29)
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 2025 — within 3 year(s) of the newest study here
Sample size 2 / 4 110 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 2 / 7 Cited 9 times (OpenAlex, 2026-10-10)
Citations per year 2 / 5 3.0 citations a year over 3 year(s) since 2025
Impact for its field and year 3 / 6 Cited 5.7× the average for papers of its field and year (OpenAlex FWCI)
Cited by studies here 1 / 6 Cited by 1 other studies in this library
Still being cited 1 / 4 Cited 9 times in 2024–2026 (2026 still in progress; OpenAlex)
Senior author's track record 2 / 4 Last-listed author Alexandra König: h-index 23 (OpenAlex, whole career)
Institution's track record 1 / 3 University of Edinburgh: institution h-index 1,378 (OpenAlex)
Multi-centre collaboration 3 / 3 OpenAlex lists 23 institution(s) in 4 countries
Indexed in PubMed 2 / 2 Indexed in PubMed (PMID 40415342)
Free to read 2 / 2 Free to read
Total 48 / 100 —

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

Alexopoulou, Z.-S., Köhler, S., Mallick, E., Tröger, J., Linz, N., Spruth, E. J., et al. (2025). Speech-based digital cognitive assessments for detection of mild cognitive impairment: Validation against paper-based neurocognitive assessment scores. Journal of Alzheimer s Disease. https://doi.org/10.1177/13872877251343296

Vancouver

Alexopoulou Z.-S, Köhler S, Mallick E, Tröger J, Linz N, Spruth EJ, et al. Speech-based digital cognitive assessments for detection of mild cognitive impairment: Validation against paper-based neurocognitive assessment scores. Journal of Alzheimer s Disease. 2025. doi:10.1177/13872877251343296. PMID: 40415342.

BibTeX

@article{alexopoulou2025-40415342,
  author  = {Alexopoulou, Zampeta-Sofia and Köhler, Stefanie and Mallick, Elisa and Tröger, Johannes and Linz, Nicklas and Spruth, Eike Jakob and Fließbach, Klaus and Bartels, Claudia and others},
  title   = {{Speech-based digital cognitive assessments for detection of mild cognitive impairment: Validation against paper-based neurocognitive assessment scores}},
  journal = {Journal of Alzheimer s Disease},
  year    = {2025},
  doi     = {10.1177/13872877251343296},
  pmid    = {40415342},
  url     = {https://doi.org/10.1177/13872877251343296}
}

Studies this one cites

Referenced by this study and also in the alzhub library, so you can read them here. Showing 12 of 14.

Later studies that cite this one

1 study in the alzhub library lists this one in its references.

Related studies in Getting a diagnosis

Similar studies

More on Getting a diagnosis

See all studies in Getting a diagnosis →