Home › Research › Cognitive tests and assessment
The German version of the tablet-based UCSF Brain Health Assessment is sensitive to early symptoms of neurodegenerative disorders
Gianina T, Lorena S, Dilaxy K, Patrick C, Florian K, Thomas M, Ursi K, Andreas UM et al.. Brain and behavior, 2023-12-02
Topic: Risk, prevention and care in population studies
Introduction Cognition often remains unassessed in primary care. To improve early diagnosis of neurocognitive disorder (NCD) in Switzerland, the tablet-based UCSF brain health assessment (BHA) and brain health survey (BHS) were validated. Methods The German BHA, BHS, and Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) were administered to 67 patients with mild/major NCD and 50 controls. BHA includes subtests of memory, executive, visuospatial, and language functioning, and informant-based BHS asks about behavior and motor functioning. Results The complete instrument (BHA + BHS) was most accurate at detecting mild NCD (AUC = 0.95) and NCD without amyloid pathology (AUC = 0.96), followed by the BHA. All measures were accurate (all AUCs > 0.95) at distinguishing major NCD and NCD with amyloid pathology (Alzheimer's disease [AD]) from controls. Discussion The German BHA and BHS are more sensitive to mild NCD and non-AD presentations than the MoCA and thus have a high potential to identify patients with NCD in primary care earlier than currently used screens.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Gianina, T., Lorena, S., Dilaxy, K., Patrick, C., Florian, K., Thomas, M., et al. (2023). The German version of the tablet-based UCSF Brain Health Assessment is sensitive to early symptoms of neurodegenerative disorders. Brain and behavior. https://doi.org/10.1002/brb3.3329
Vancouver
Gianina T, Lorena S, Dilaxy K, Patrick C, Florian K, Thomas M, et al. The German version of the tablet-based UCSF Brain Health Assessment is sensitive to early symptoms of neurodegenerative disorders. Brain and behavior. 2023. doi:10.1002/brb3.3329. PMID: 38041514.
BibTeX
@article{gianina2023-38041514,
author = {Gianina, T. and Lorena, S. and Dilaxy, K. and Patrick, C. and Florian, K. and Thomas, M. and Ursi, K. and Andreas, U. M. and others},
title = {{The German version of the tablet-based UCSF Brain Health Assessment is sensitive to early symptoms of neurodegenerative disorders}},
journal = {Brain and behavior},
year = {2023},
doi = {10.1002/brb3.3329},
pmid = {38041514},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1002/brb3.3329}
}
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
- Results The complete instrument (BHA + BHS) was most accurate at detecting mild NCD (AUC = 0.95) and NCD without amyloid pathology (AUC = 0.96), followed by the BHA.
Study details
- Participants67
- Effect sizeAUC = 0.95; AUC = 0.96
- Evidence strengthLow
How this study scored 55/100
Published in a peer-reviewed journal. Scored zero for study design and randomized / 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 multicenter collaboration, so those were left out: it earned 32 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 55 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 7 / 10 | Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Brain and behavior) |
| 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 | 3 / 5 | 2023 — within 6 year(s) of the newest study here |
| Sample size | 1 / 4 | 67 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) |
| Randomized / blinded | 0 / 2 | No randomization 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 |
| Multicenter collaboration | — / 3 | Institutions not listed — left out of this score |
| Indexed in PubMed | 2 / 2 | Indexed in PubMed (PMID 38041514) |
| Free to read | 2 / 2 | Free to read |
| Points | 32 / 58 | Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 32 of the 58 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.
Related
Studies in the library that share something with this one. The line above each title says what.