Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34721181›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in psychology2021

Feasibility of Remote Performance Assessment Using the Free Research Executive Evaluation Test Battery in Adolescents.

Isis Angelica Segura, Sabine Pompéia

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

2 authors.

Isis Angelica SeguraDepartamento de Psicobiologia, Universidade Federal de São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil.
Sabine PompéiaDepartamento de Psicobiologia, Universidade Federal de São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Lockdowns and other preventive measures taken to curb the spread of diseases such as COVID-19 have restricted the use of face-to-face cognitive assessment. Remote testing may be an alternative, but it should first be shown to be comparable to in-person assessment before being used more widely, during and after the pandemic. Our aim was to evaluate the suitability of online, examiner-mediated administration of an open-access battery of executive function tests (the Free Research Executive Evaluation battery, or FREE) that can be adapted considering various characteristics of diverse populations and therefore used worldwide. A total of 96 9-15-year olds (42 girls) were tested, half of whom online through video calls mediated by an examiner. Their performance was compared to that of the other 48 individuals tested face-to-face, who were matched against the online-tested participants for age, pubertal status, sex, and parental schooling. The battery consists of two tests of the following executive domains: Updating (2-Back and Number Memory tests), Inhibition (Stroop Victoria and Stroop Happy-Sad), and Switching (Color Shape and Category Switch). Answers were vocal and self-paced, and the examiner recorded accuracy and time taken to complete in-person and online tasks. Only free software is needed for the assessment. Executive measures obtained from the tasks did not differ statistically between online and in-person tested participants and effects sizes of group effects were small, thus showing that the FREE test battery holds promise for online cognitive assessment, pending confirmation in different samples and further validation studies.

Indexed as

adolescentsCOVID-19executive functionsinhibitiononline testingshiftingupdating

Identifiers

PMID34721181
PMCPMC8551358

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.