Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32607409›Full record

ArticleAlzheimer's & dementia (New York, N. Y.)2020

Unsupervised assessment of cognition in the Healthy Brain Project: Implications for web-based registries of individuals at risk for Alzheimer's disease.

Stephanie Perin, Rachel F Buckley, Matthew P Pase, Nawaf Yassi, Alexandra Lavale, Peter H Wilson, Adrian Schembri, Paul Maruff, Yen Ying Lim

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Alzheimer's & dementia (New York, N. Y.), 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 31 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
31citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

31 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Validation and convergent validity of the Boston cognitive assessment (BOCA) in an Italian population: a comparative study with the Montreal cognitive assessment (MoCA) in Alzheimer's disease spectrum.Neurological sciences : official journal of the Italian Neurological Society and of the Italian Society of Clinical Neurophysiology · 2025
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. The relationship between cognitive engagement and better memory in midlife.Alzheimer's & dementia (Amsterdam, Netherlands) · 2022
    Article
  19. Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Stephanie PerinMelbourne Dementia Research Centre Florey Institute of Neuroscience and Mental Health and the University of Melbourne Parkville Victoria Australia.
Rachel F BuckleyMelbourne Dementia Research Centre Florey Institute of Neuroscience and Mental Health and the University of Melbourne Parkville Victoria Australia.
Matthew P PaseMelbourne Dementia Research Centre Florey Institute of Neuroscience and Mental Health and the University of Melbourne Parkville Victoria Australia.
Nawaf YassiMelbourne Dementia Research Centre Florey Institute of Neuroscience and Mental Health and the University of Melbourne Parkville Victoria Australia.
Alexandra LavaleMelbourne Dementia Research Centre Florey Institute of Neuroscience and Mental Health and the University of Melbourne Parkville Victoria Australia.
Peter H WilsonSchool of Psychology Faculty of Health Sciences Australian Catholic University Melbourne Victoria Australia.
Adrian SchembriCogstate Ltd Melbourne Victoria Australia.
Paul MaruffMelbourne Dementia Research Centre Florey Institute of Neuroscience and Mental Health and the University of Melbourne Parkville Victoria Australia.
Yen Ying LimMelbourne Dementia Research Centre Florey Institute of Neuroscience and Mental Health and the University of Melbourne Parkville Victoria Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionWeb-based platforms are used increasingly to assess cognitive function in unsupervised settings. The utility of cognitive data arising from unsupervised assessments remains unclear. We examined the acceptability, usability, and validity of unsupervised cognitive testing in middle-aged adults enrolled in the Healthy Brain Project.

methodsA total of 1594 participants completed unsupervised assessments of the Cogstate Brief Battery. Acceptability was defined by the amount of missing data, and usability by examining error of test performance and the time taken to read task instructions and complete tests (learnability).

resultsOverall, we observed high acceptability (98% complete data) and high usability (95% met criteria for low error rates and high learnability). Test validity was confirmed by observation of expected inverse relationships between performance and increasing test difficulty and age.

conclusionConsideration of test design paired with acceptability and usability criteria can provide valid indices of cognition in the unsupervised settings used to develop registries of individuals at risk for Alzheimer's disease.

Indexed as

acceptabilityAlzheimer's diseaseneuropsychological testneuropsychologyneuroscienceonline systemspsychological testusabilityvalidity

Identifiers

PMID32607409
PMCPMC7317647

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.