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 45 out of 100. Risk factors

Topic: Amyloid, tau and blood-test diagnosis

The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic accelerated development of innovative methods for conducting research remotely via digital technologies. However, few studies have examined participant technological literacy skills or access as key social determinants of brain health in aging populations at risk of Alzheimer's disease and other dementias. To identify associations of sociodemographic and clinical characteristics, cognitive status and geolocation with digital technology access and skill within dementia research cohorts. A self-administered questionnaire surveyed digital access and literacy skills in persons enrolled across various studies conducted at Emory Goizueta Alzheimer's Disease Research Center. We investigated cognitive and sociodemographic characteristics, and neighborhood disadvantage related to these digital attributes. Of 1860 participants (mean age: 65.3 years (SD:11.4)) surveyed, 71.6% were women, 87.1% Whites, 10.4% African Americans, and 46.9% had postgraduate-level education. Most participants had access to digital devices: desktop (53.7%), laptop (81.6%), tablet (71.6%), smartphone (94.6%), internet (82.0%), or videoconferencing (95.5%). Cognitively unimpaired participants had higher odds of digital access (OR:3.75; 95% CI:2.45-5.73) and skill (OR:1.22; 95% CI:1.14-1.30). Although Whites were likelier to have access (OR:1.36; 95% CI:1.01-1.82) than African Americans, no differences were found in skill between the two groups. Living in more disadvantaged neighborhoods was significantly associated with lower technology skills (OR:0.86; 95% CI:0.82-0.91). Cognitive impairment, race, and neighborhood socioeconomic disadvantage are significant barriers which limit digital access and skill. Improving digital knowledge, skill-building, and geographic access may encourage research participation especially in geographically remote or disadvantaged areas and help narrow sociodemographic and racial disparities existing in dementia research.

Key findings

Why it matters

Among adults enrolled in Alzheimer's research, cognitive impairment, race, and neighborhood disadvantage were linked to lower digital access and skill. This matters for who can take part in remote research assessments, not for treating or preventing the disease itself.

Study details

How this study scored 45/100
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 3 of 4; Effect reported 2 of 3; Studied in people 3 of 3; Randomised / blinded 0 of 2; Times cited 2 of 7; Citations per year 1 of 5; Impact for its field and year 3 of 6; Cited by studies here 0 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 1 of 3; Indexed in PubMed 2 of 2; Free to read 0 of 2. Total 45 of 100.45 of 100 points earned55 not earned

Published in a peer-reviewed journal. Scored zero for study design 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 : JAD)
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 2024 — within 3 year(s) of the newest study here
Sample size 3 / 4 1,860 participants
Effect reported 2 / 3 Effect reported as a number, without an interval or test
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 7 times (OpenAlex, 2026-10-10)
Citations per year 1 / 5 1.8 citations a year over 4 year(s) since 2024
Impact for its field and year 3 / 6 Cited 6.1× the average for papers of its field and year (OpenAlex FWCI)
Cited by studies here 0 / 6 No other study in this library cites it
Still being cited 1 / 4 Cited 7 times in 2024–2026 (2026 still in progress; OpenAlex)
Senior author's track record 2 / 4 Last-listed author Ihab M. Hajjar: h-index 44 (OpenAlex, whole career)
Institution's track record 1 / 3 Emory University: institution h-index 1,360 (OpenAlex)
Multi-centre collaboration 1 / 3 OpenAlex lists 2 institution(s) in 1 country
Indexed in PubMed 2 / 2 Indexed in PubMed (PMID 39659188)
Free to read 0 / 2 Behind a paywall — scores zero
Total 45 / 100 —

What each of these 20 components measures, and what this score is not →

Read the original

May need a subscription OpenAlex found no free copy of the full text (checked 6 Feb 1020), so the publisher may charge for it. The PubMed abstract is free.

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

Maureen, O., Zhiyi, Y., Vickers Kayci, L., Katherine, S., Najé, S., Hewitt Kelsey, C., et al. (2024). Technology literacy and access to digital resources for remote assessment among adults enrolled in Alzheimer's disease research. Journal of Alzheimer's disease : JAD. https://doi.org/10.1177/13872877241297496

Vancouver

Maureen O, Zhiyi Y, Vickers Kayci L, Katherine S, Najé S, Hewitt Kelsey C, et al. Technology literacy and access to digital resources for remote assessment among adults enrolled in Alzheimer's disease research. Journal of Alzheimer's disease : JAD. 2024. doi:10.1177/13872877241297496. PMID: 39659188.

BibTeX

@article{maureen2024-39659188,
  author  = {Maureen, Okafor and Zhiyi, Yang and Vickers Kayci, L. and Katherine, Sanders and Najé, Simama and Hewitt Kelsey, C. and James, Lah and Levey Allan, I. and others},
  title   = {{Technology literacy and access to digital resources for remote assessment among adults enrolled in Alzheimer's disease research}},
  journal = {Journal of Alzheimer's disease : JAD},
  year    = {2024},
  doi     = {10.1177/13872877241297496},
  pmid    = {39659188},
  url     = {https://doi.org/10.1177/13872877241297496}
}

Studies this one cites

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

Related studies in Risk factors

Also in Risk factors

356 studies in the library are filed under Risk factors with no topic tag they share with another; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed tour of them. The Risk factors hub.

Similar studies

More on Risk factors

See all studies in Risk factors →