Home › Research › Cognitive tests and assessment
Unsupervised mobile cognitive testing for use in preclinical Alzheimer's disease
Papp KV, Samaroo A, Chou HC, Buckley R, Schneider OR, Hsieh S, Soberanes D, Quiroz Y et al.. Alzheimer's & dementia (Amsterdam, Netherlands), 2021-09-30
Topic: Brain imaging, connectivity and assessment
Introduction Unsupervised digital cognitive testing is an appealing means to capture subtle cognitive decline in preclinical Alzheimer's disease (AD). Here, we describe development, feasibility, and validity of the Boston Remote Assessment for Neurocognitive Health (BRANCH) against in-person cognitive testing and amyloid/tau burden. Methods BRANCH is web-based, self-guided, and assesses memory processes vulnerable in AD. Clinically normal participants (n = 234; aged 50-89) completed BRANCH; a subset underwent in-person cognitive testing and positron emission tomography imaging. Mean accuracy across BRANCH tests (Categories, Face-Name-Occupation, Groceries, Signs) was calculated. Results BRANCH was feasible to complete on participants' own devices (primarily smartphones). Technical difficulties and invalid/unusable data were infrequent. BRANCH psychometric properties were sound, including good retest reliability. BRANCH was correlated with in-person cognitive testing ( r = 0.617, P < .001). Lower BRANCH score was associated with greater amyloid ( r = -0.205, P = .007) and entorhinal tau ( r = -0.178, P = .026). Discussion BRANCH reliably captures meaningful cognitive information remotely, suggesting promise as a digital cognitive marker sensitive early in the AD trajectory.
Key findings
- Results BRANCH was feasible to complete on participants' own devices (primarily smartphones).
- Lower BRANCH score was associated with greater amyloid ( r = -0.205, P = .007) and entorhinal tau ( r = -0.178, P = .026).
Study details
- Participants234
- Evidence strengthLow
How this study scored 55/100
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 32 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 55 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 | 3 / 5 | 2021 — within 6 year(s) of the newest study here |
| Sample size | 2 / 4 | 234 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 34621977) |
| 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.
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
Papp, K. V., Samaroo, A., Chou, H. C., Buckley, R., Schneider, O. R., Hsieh, S., et al. (2021). Unsupervised mobile cognitive testing for use in preclinical Alzheimer's disease. Alzheimer's & dementia (Amsterdam, Netherlands). https://doi.org/10.1002/dad2.12243
Vancouver
Papp KV, Samaroo A, Chou HC, Buckley R, Schneider OR, Hsieh S, et al. Unsupervised mobile cognitive testing for use in preclinical Alzheimer's disease. Alzheimer's & dementia (Amsterdam, Netherlands). 2021. doi:10.1002/dad2.12243. PMID: 34621977.
BibTeX
@article{papp2021-34621977,
author = {Papp, K. V. and Samaroo, A. and Chou, H. C. and Buckley, R. and Schneider, O. R. and Hsieh, S. and Soberanes, D. and Quiroz, Y. and others},
title = {{Unsupervised mobile cognitive testing for use in preclinical Alzheimer's disease}},
journal = {Alzheimer's \& dementia (Amsterdam, Netherlands)},
year = {2021},
doi = {10.1002/dad2.12243},
pmid = {34621977},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1002/dad2.12243}
}