Home › Research › Cognitive tests and assessment
The Mobile Toolbox for remote, self-administered cognitive assessment in older adults: associations with in-clinic cognitive testing and Alzheimer's disease biomarkers
Jutten RJ, Burling JE, Slade E, Thompson JC, Fu JF, Birkenbihl C, Properzi MJ, Marshall GA et al.. Alzheimer's & dementia (Amsterdam, Netherlands), 2025-07-01
Topic: Risk, prevention and care in population studies
Introduction Remote, smartphone-based cognitive assessments such as the Mobile Toolbox (MTB) may increase the accessibility of Alzheimer's disease (AD) clinical trials. We examined the feasibility of the MTB among cognitively unimpaired (CU) older adults and investigated its associations with standardized in-clinic cognitive testing and amyloid and tau positron emission tomography imaging. Methods A total of 100 CU older adults self-administered the MTB remotely on their personal devices. Linear regression models correcting for demographics investigated associations of MTB fluid and crystallized cognition composites with in-clinic Preclinical Alzheimer's Cognitive Composite-5 (PACC-5) scores, global amyloid-beta burden and tau deposition in the medial-temporal lobe and neocortex. Results Most participants completed the MTB without requiring assistance (81%) or reminders (61%). MTB fluid cognition scores were positively associated with PACC-5 scores and negatively with tau deposition in the medial-temporal lobe and neocortex. Discussion These findings suggest that the MTB may provide a feasible approach to capture cognitive processes relevant in preclinical AD. Highlights The Mobile Toolbox (MTB) is a remote smartphone-based cognitive assessment.We deployed the MTB in CU older adults with Alzheimer's disease (AD) biomarkers.We show how the MTB may facilitate cognitive assessment in preclinical AD research.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Jutten, R. J., Burling, J. E., Slade, E., Thompson, J. C., Fu, J. F., Birkenbihl, C., et al. (2025). The Mobile Toolbox for remote, self-administered cognitive assessment in older adults: associations with in-clinic cognitive testing and Alzheimer's disease biomarkers. Alzheimer's & dementia (Amsterdam, Netherlands). https://doi.org/10.1002/dad2.70160
Vancouver
Jutten RJ, Burling JE, Slade E, Thompson JC, Fu JF, Birkenbihl C, et al. The Mobile Toolbox for remote, self-administered cognitive assessment in older adults: associations with in-clinic cognitive testing and Alzheimer's disease biomarkers. Alzheimer's & dementia (Amsterdam, Netherlands). 2025. doi:10.1002/dad2.70160. PMID: 40836942.
BibTeX
@article{jutten2025-40836942,
author = {Jutten, R. J. and Burling, J. E. and Slade, E. and Thompson, J. C. and Fu, J. F. and Birkenbihl, C. and Properzi, M. J. and Marshall, G. A. and others},
title = {{The Mobile Toolbox for remote, self-administered cognitive assessment in older adults: associations with in-clinic cognitive testing and Alzheimer's disease biomarkers}},
journal = {Alzheimer's \& dementia (Amsterdam, Netherlands)},
year = {2025},
doi = {10.1002/dad2.70160},
pmid = {40836942},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1002/dad2.70160}
}
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 Most participants completed the MTB without requiring assistance (81%) or reminders (61%).
- MTB fluid cognition scores were positively associated with PACC-5 scores and negatively with tau deposition in the medial-temporal lobe and neocortex.
- Discussion These findings suggest that the MTB may provide a feasible approach to capture cognitive processes relevant in preclinical AD.
Study details
- Participants100
- Evidence strengthLow
How this study scored 57/100
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 and multi-centre collaboration, so those were left out: it earned 33 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 57 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 9 / 10 | Tier 2 — leading specialty journal (Alzheimer's & dementia (Amsterdam, Netherlands)) |
| 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 | 2025 — within 3 year(s) of the newest study here |
| Sample size | 2 / 4 | 100 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 40836942) |
| Free to read | 2 / 2 | Free to read |
| Points | 33 / 58 | Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 33 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 57 out of 100. |
| Total | 57 / 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 Cognitive tests and assessment
Also tagged “cognitive-testing”
3 studies in the library carry the topic tag “cognitive-testing”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 3 tagged studies.