ArticleGeroScience2019
Validation of a digitally delivered visual paired comparison task: reliability and convergent validity with established cognitive tests.
Article in GeroScience, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 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
20 citing papers in PubMed.
- Acute Inositol-Stabilized Arginine Silicate Improves Cognitive Outcomes in Healthy Adults.Nutrients · 2021Trial
- Simulating object recognition with the Standard Operating Procedures (SOP) model.Psychonomic bulletin & review · 2026Review
- Microbaric oxygen therapy modulates EEG microstates and spectral power in patients with chronic insomnia disorder.BMC psychiatry · 2026Article
- Detecting early stages of Alzheimer's disease using a web-based cognitive battery.GeroScience · 2025Article
- Development of a digital memory and learning test for elderly individuals.BMC geriatrics · 2025Article
- The examination of physical function and cognitive outcomes in middle-to-older high-risk adults: an unsupervised clustering method.Frontiers in public health · 2025Article
- Early Detection of Amyloid-Related Changes in Memory among Cognitively Unimpaired Older Adults with Daily Digital Testing.Annals of neurology · 2024Article
- Checking Different Video Game Mechanics to Assess Cognitive Abilities in Groups with and without Emotional Problems.Journal of Intelligence · 2023Article
- Unsupervised high-frequency smartphone-based cognitive assessments are reliable, valid, and feasible in older adults at risk for Alzheimer's disease.Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society : JINS · 2023Article
- Associations of an eye-tracking task and pupillary metrics with age and ASA physical status score in a preoperative cohort.Journal of clinical monitoring and computing · 2023Article
- A Novel Digital Digit-Symbol Substitution Test Measuring Processing Speed in Adults At Risk for Alzheimer Disease: Validation Study.JMIR aging · 2023Article
- Eye-tracking paradigms for the assessment of mild cognitive impairment: a systematic review.Frontiers in psychology · 2023Review
- The efficacy and practicality of the Neurotrack Cognitive Battery assessment for utilization in clinical settings for the identification of cognitive decline in an older Japanese population.Frontiers in aging neuroscience · 2023Article
- Asynchronous Remote Assessment for Cognitive Impairment: Reliability Verification of the Neurotrack Cognitive Battery.JMIR formative research · 2022Article
- Intervention for a Digital, Cognitive, Multi-Domain Alzheimer Risk Velocity Study: Protocol for a Randomized Controlled Trial.JMIR research protocols · 2022Article
- Time-restricted feeding and cognitive function in sedentary and physically active elderly individuals: Ramadan diurnal intermittent fasting as a model.Frontiers in nutrition · 2022Article
- Cognitive management in a digital world.Aging · 2021Article
- Cognitive decline negatively impacts physical function.Experimental gerontology · 2021Article
- Unsupervised mobile cognitive testing for use in preclinical Alzheimer's disease.Alzheimer's & dementia (Amsterdam, Netherlands) · 2021Article
- An associative analysis of recognition memory: Relative recency effects in an eye-tracking paradigm.Journal of experimental psychology. Animal learning and cognition · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Alzheimer's disease (AD) affects the memory and cognitive function of approximately 5.7 million Americans. Early detection subsequently allows for earlier treatment and improves outcomes. Currently, there exists a validated 30-min eye-tracking cognitive assessment (VPC-30) for predicting AD risk. However, a shorter assessment would improve user experience and improve scalability. Thus, the purposes were to (1) determine convergent validity between the 5-min web camera-based eye-tracking task (VPC-5) and VPC-30, (2) examine the relationship between VPC-5 and gold-standard cognitive tests, and (3) determine the reliability and stability of VPC-5. This prospective study included two healthy cohorts: older adults (65+ years, n = 20) and younger adults (18-46 years, n = 24). Participants were tested on two separate occasions. Visit 1 included the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA), Digit Symbol Coding test (DSC), NIH Toolbox Cognitive Battery (NIHTB-CB), VPC-30, and VPC-5. Visit 2 occurred at least 14 days later; participants completed the VPC-5, DSC, NIHTB-CB, and dual-task walking assessments (DT). VPC-30 significantly correlated with VPC-5 at the first (p < .001) and second (p = .001) time points. VPC-5 and DSC (p < .01) and Pattern Comparison Processing Speed Test (PSPAC) (p = .01) were also correlated on day 1. Significant associations existed between VPC-5 and DSC (p < .001), Flanker Inhibitory Control Test (p = .05), PSPAC (p < .001), and Picture Sequence Memory Test (p = .02) during day 14 testing session. The test retest reliability of VPC-5 was significant (p < .001). VPC-5 displayed moderate convergent validity with the VPC-30 and gold-standard measures of cognition, while demonstrating strong stability, suggesting it is a valuable assessment for monitoring memory function.
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.