Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34612605›Full record

ArticleBrain and behavior2021

Naturalistic smartphone keyboard typing reflects processing speed and executive function.

Mindy K Ross, Alexander P Demos, John Zulueta, Andrea Piscitello, Scott A Langenecker, Melvin McInnis, Olusola Ajilore, Peter C Nelson, Kelly A Ryan, Alex Leow

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Brain and behavior, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
26citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.6field-weighted citation impact, top 10% of its field
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

26 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 27 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Unobtrusive inference of circadian rhythms from smartphone data.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2025
    Article
  11. Observational
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Smartphone keyboard dynamics predict affect in suicidal ideation.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2023
    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

10 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Mindy K RossUniversity of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, Illinois, USA.
Alexander P DemosUniversity of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, Illinois, USA.
John ZuluetaUniversity of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, Illinois, USA.
Andrea PiscitelloUniversity of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, Illinois, USA.
Scott A LangeneckerUniversity of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, Illinois, USA.
Melvin McInnisUniversity of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA.
Olusola AjiloreUniversity of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, Illinois, USA.
Peter C NelsonUniversity of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, Illinois, USA.
Kelly A RyanUniversity of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA.
Alex LeowUniversity of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, Illinois, USA.
University of Illinois Chicago · USMichigan United · US

Funding

Michigan Institute for Clinical and Health Research (MICHR)UL1TR002240 · NCATS · UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN AT ANN ARBOR · PI LUMENG, JULIE C, MASHOUR, GEORGE ALEXANDER · 2017 to 2022
$54.9M
Unobtrusive Monitoring of Affective Symptoms and Cognition using Keyboard DynamicsR01MH120168 · NIMH · UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS AT CHICAGO · PI AJILORE, OLUSOLA A., LEOW, ALEX · 2020 to 2024
$3.2M
Michigan Institute for Clinical and Health Research (MCHR)KL2TR000434 · NCATS · UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN AT ANN ARBOR · PI MASHOUR, GEORGE ALEXANDER · 2012 to 2016
$1.7M
NCATS NIH HHS KL2 TR000434NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR002240NIMH NIH HHS R01 MH120168
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThe increase in smartphone usage has enabled the possibility of more accessible ways to conduct neuropsychological evaluations. The objective of this study was to determine the feasibility of using smartphone typing dynamics with mood scores to supplement cognitive assessment through trail making tests.

methodsUsing a custom-built keyboard, naturalistic keypress dynamics were unobtrusively recorded in individuals with bipolar disorder (n = 11) and nonbipolar controls (n = 8) on an Android smartphone. Keypresses were matched to digital trail making tests part B (dTMT-B) administered daily in two periods and weekly mood assessments. Following comparison of dTMT-Bs to the pencil-and-paper equivalent, longitudinal mixed-effects models were used to analyze daily dTMT-B performance as a function of typing and mood.

resultsComparison of the first dTMT-B to paper TMT-B showed adequate reliability (intraclass correlations = 0.74). In our model, we observed that participants who typed slower took longer to complete dTMT-B (b = 0.189, p < .001). This trend was also seen in individual fluctuations in typing speed and dTMT-B performance (b = 0.032, p = .004). Moreover, participants who were more depressed completed the dTMT-B slower than less depressed participants (b = 0.189, p < .001). A practice effect was observed for the dTMT-Bs.

conclusionTyping speed in combination with depression scores has the potential to infer aspects of cognition (visual attention, processing speed, and task switching) in people's natural environment to complement formal in-person neuropsychological assessments that commonly include the trail making test.

Indexed as

Executive FunctionSmartphoneCognitionHumansNeuropsychological TestsReproducibility of ResultsTrail Making Testbipolar disordercognitionmHealthtrail making teststyping dynamics

Identifiers

PMID34612605
PMCPMC8613429
OpenAlexW3203559396

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.