Home › Research › Getting a diagnosis
Usability of a Tablet-Based Cognitive Assessment Administered by Medical Assistants in General Practice: Implementation Study
Philipp Schäper, Alexander Hanke, Stephan Jonas, Leon Nissen, Lara Marie Reimer, Florian Schweizer, Michael Wagner, Kristin Rolke et al.. JMIR Formative Research, 2025-12-22
Topic: Risk, prevention and care in population studies
The results indicated good usability for the MoCA Duo. Self-assessment by the patients indicated that 64% (191/299) could perform in the test to the best of their ability, affected by their MoCA score. We found significant higher usability ratings by patients with better MoCA scores as well as by younger patients. Furthermore, the perceived workload showed overall medium workload. We found significant correlations between the subjective perceived workload of the patients and the assessment by MAs. Self-assessments as well as assessments by the MAs were significantly influenced by the MoCA scores and the age of the participants. The results indicate good usability of the digital MoCA within the sample, supporting the idea that the resulting scores are adequate to assess cognitive status without dependence on technological affinity. Furthermore, the results highlight the relevance of heterogenous samples for comparable evaluation studies, based on the significant effect of cognitive status and age on usability and workload.
Key findings
- The results indicated good usability for the MoCA Duo.
- Self-assessment by the patients indicated that 64% (191/299) could perform in the test to the best of their ability, affected by their MoCA score.
- We found significant higher usability ratings by patients with better MoCA scores as well as by younger patients.
- Furthermore, the perceived workload showed overall medium workload.
- We found significant correlations between the subjective perceived workload of the patients and the assessment by MAs.
Why it matters
This implementation study found good usability for a tablet-based MoCA administered by medical assistants in general practice, with usability ratings influenced by cognitive status and age. It is about a digital assessment tool and does not treat, cure or prevent Alzheimer's disease.
New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Getting a diagnosis →
Study details
- Evidence strengthLow
How this study scored 34/100
Published in a peer-reviewed journal. Scored zero for study design, sample size, effect reported, studied in people and randomised / blinded because the record does not state it.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 7 / 10 | Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (JMIR Formative Research) |
| Journal's citation record | 0 / 4 | JMIR Formative Research: journal h-index 54 (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 | 0 / 4 | Participant count not stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Effect reported | 0 / 3 | No effect size reported — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Studied in people | 0 / 3 | Not stated whether this was studied in people — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Randomised / blinded | 0 / 2 | No randomisation or blinding stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Times cited | 1 / 7 | Cited 2 times (OpenAlex, 2026-10-10) |
| Citations per year | 0 / 5 | 0.7 citations a year over 3 year(s) since 2025 |
| Impact for its field and year | 2 / 6 | Cited 1.7× 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 | 0 / 4 | Cited 2 times in 2024–2026 (2026 still in progress; OpenAlex) |
| Senior author's track record | 2 / 4 | Last-listed author Jochen René Thyrian: h-index 40 (OpenAlex, whole career) |
| Institution's track record | 1 / 3 | Technical University of Munich: institution h-index 1,092 (OpenAlex) |
| Multi-centre collaboration | 2 / 3 | OpenAlex lists 6 institution(s) in 1 country |
| Indexed in PubMed | 2 / 2 | Indexed in PubMed (PMID 41429419) |
| Free to read | 2 / 2 | Free to read |
| Total | 34 / 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
Schäper, P., Hanke, A., Jonas, S., Nissen, L., Reimer, L. M., Schweizer, F., et al. (2025). Usability of a Tablet-Based Cognitive Assessment Administered by Medical Assistants in General Practice: Implementation Study. JMIR Formative Research. https://doi.org/10.2196/76010
Vancouver
Schäper P, Hanke A, Jonas S, Nissen L, Reimer LM, Schweizer F, et al. Usability of a Tablet-Based Cognitive Assessment Administered by Medical Assistants in General Practice: Implementation Study. JMIR Formative Research. 2025. doi:10.2196/76010. PMID: 41429419.
BibTeX
@article{schaper2025-41429419,
author = {Schäper, Philipp and Hanke, Alexander and Jonas, Stephan and Nissen, Leon and Reimer, Lara Marie and Schweizer, Florian and Wagner, Michael and Rolke, Kristin and others},
title = {{Usability of a Tablet-Based Cognitive Assessment Administered by Medical Assistants in General Practice: Implementation Study}},
journal = {JMIR Formative Research},
year = {2025},
doi = {10.2196/76010},
pmid = {41429419},
url = {https://doi.org/10.2196/76010}
}
Studies this one cites
Referenced by this study and also in the alzhub library, so you can read them here.
Related studies in Getting a diagnosis
Also tagged “assessment”
840 studies in the library carry the topic tag “assessment”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 840 tagged studies.