ArticleScientific reports2016
Development of a self-administered web-based test for longitudinal cognitive assessment.
Article in Scientific reports, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
27 citing papers in PubMed.
- Examining Heterogeneity in Cognitive Development Trajectories from Late Childhood to Emerging Adulthood and Their Association with Depressive Symptoms: Evidence from Eight Years of Nationally Representative Data in China.Journal of youth and adolescence · 2026Article
- Development and Preliminary Validation of ORCA-PD, an Online Rapid Cognitive Assessment for Parkinson Disease: Mixed Methods Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- Measuring executive functions online: Interactive effects of experimenter presence, instruction feedback, session order, and task difficulty.Psychological research · 2025Article
- Article
- Review
- Test-retest reliability, practice effects and estimates of change: A study on the Mindmore digital cognitive assessment tool.Scandinavian journal of psychology · 2025Article
- The Potential of Automated Assessment of Cognitive Function Using Non-Neuroimaging Data: A Systematic Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Review
- A Longitudinal Study of CogEvo's Prediction of Cognitive Decline in Older Adults.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Validation of a web-based self-administered test for cognitive assessment in a Swedish geriatric setting.PloS one · 2024Article
- Long-term neurological complications in COVID-19 survivors: study protocol of a prospective cohort study (NeurodegCoV-19).BMJ open · 2023Article
- Article
- Newly self-administered two-step tool for screening cognitive function in an ageing Chinese population: an exploratory cross-sectional study.General psychiatry · 2023Article
- Development and validation of a brief digital cognitive test based on the paradigm of stimulus equivalence in a sample of older adults.Dementia & neuropsychologia · 2023Article
- Digital Cognitive Biomarker for Mild Cognitive Impairments and Dementia: A Systematic Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Review
- Self-administered Web-Based Tests of Executive Functioning and Perceptual Speed: Measurement Development Study With a Large Probability-Based Survey Panel.Journal of medical Internet research · 2022Article
- The Cognitive Sequelae of Transient Ischemic Attacks-Recent Insights and Future Directions.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Review
- Boston cognitive assessment (BOCA) - a comprehensive self-administered smartphone- and computer-based at-home test for longitudinal tracking of cognitive performance.BMC neurology · 2022Article
- Cognitive decline in patients with prostate cancer: study protocol of a prospective cohort, NEON-PC.BMJ open · 2021Article
- Usefulness of CogEvo, a computerized cognitive assessment and training tool, for distinguishing patients with mild Alzheimer's disease and mild cognitive impairment from cognitively normal older people.Geriatrics & gerontology international · 2021Article
- Comparing Web-Based and Lab-Based Cognitive Assessment Using the Cambridge Neuropsychological Test Automated Battery: A Within-Subjects Counterbalanced Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Sequential testing with brief cognitive tools has been recommended to improve cognitive screening and monitoring, however the few available tools still depend on an external evaluator and periodic visits. We developed a self-administered computerized test intended for longitudinal cognitive testing (Brain on Track). The test can be performed from a home computer and is composed of several subtests, expected to evaluate different cognitive domains, all including random elements to minimize learning effects. An initial (A) and a refined version of the test (B) were applied to patients with mild cognitive impairment or early dementia (n = 88) and age and education-matched controls. A subsample of a population-based cohort (n = 113) performed the test at home every three months to evaluate test-retest reliability. The test's final version Cronbach's alpha was 0.90, test scores were significantly different between patients and controls (p = 0.001), the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve was 0.75 and the smallest real difference (43.04) was lower than the clinical relevant difference (56.82). In the test-retest reliability analysis 9/10 subtests showed two-way mixed single intraclass consistency correlation coefficient >0.70. These results imply good internal consistency, discriminative ability and reliability when performed at home, encouraging further longitudinal clinical and population-based studies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.