Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34870610›Full record

ArticleJMIR serious games2021

A Virtual Supermarket Program for the Screening of Mild Cognitive Impairment in Older Adults: Diagnostic Accuracy Study.

Mingli Yan, Huiru Yin, Qiuyan Meng, Shuo Wang, Yiwen Ding, Guichen Li, Chunyan Wang, Li Chen

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR serious games, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
3.7field-weighted citation impact, top 6% 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

24 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 48 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Observational
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Editorial: Covid-19 and Virtual Geriatric Care.The journal of nutrition, health & aging · 2022
    Article
  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

8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Mingli YanSchool of Nursing, Jilin University, Changchun, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0935-0117
Huiru YinSchool of Nursing, Jilin University, Changchun, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6856-8274
Qiuyan MengSchool of Nursing, Jilin University, Changchun, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2279-8004
Shuo WangSchool of Nursing, Jilin University, Changchun, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4810-8785
Yiwen DingSchool of Nursing, Jilin University, Changchun, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1596-4577
Guichen LiSchool of Nursing, Jilin University, Changchun, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3872-5296
Chunyan WangSenior Officials Inpatient Ward, First Hospital of Jilin University, Changchun, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2120-2643
Li ChenSchool of Nursing, Jilin University, Changchun, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9556-9053
Jilin University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMild cognitive impairment (MCI) is often a precursor of dementia, and patients with MCI develop dementia at a higher rate than healthy older adults. Early detection of cognitive decline at the MCI stage supports better planning of care and interventions. At present, the use of virtual reality (VR) in screening for MCI in older adults is promising, but there is little evidence regarding the use of virtual supermarkets to screen for MCI.

objectiveThe objectives of this study are to validate a VR game-based test, namely, the Virtual Supermarket Program (VSP), for differentiating patients with MCI and healthy controls and to identify cutoff scores for different age levels.

methodsSubjects were recruited from several nursing homes and communities in Changchun, China. They were divided into a healthy control group (n=64) and an MCI group (n=62). All subjects were administered the VSP and a series of neuropsychological examinations. The study determined the optimal cutoff, discriminating validity, concurrent validity, and retest reliability of the VSP. We used the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) to evaluate the discriminating validity and obtain the optimal cutoff values. Pearson correlation analysis and the intraclass correlation coefficient were used to evaluate the concurrent validity and retest reliability, respectively.

resultsA cutoff score of 46.4 was optimal for the entire sample, yielding a sensitivity of 85.9% and specificity of 79.0% for differentiating individuals with MCI and healthy controls, and the AUC was 0.870 (95% CI 0.799-0.924). The median index of VSP score was 51.1 (range 42.6-60.0). There was a moderate positive correlation between the VSP total score and Mini-Mental State Examination score (r=0.429, P<.001). There was a strong positive correlation between VSP total score and Montreal Cognitive Assessment score (r=0.645, P<.001). The retest reliability of the VSP was feasible (r=0.588, P=.048).

conclusionsThe VSP is interesting and feasible for subjects. It shows high sensitivity and specificity for the identification of MCI in older adults, which makes it a promising screening method. The VSP may be generalized to older adults in other countries, although some cultural adaptation may be necessary.

trial registrationChinese Clinical Trial Registry ChiCTR2000040074; https://www.chictr.org.cn/showprojen.aspx?proj=64639.

Indexed as

agingambient intelligencedementiadigital healthelderly populationmild cognitive impairmentvirtual reality

Identifiers

PMID34870610
PMCPMC8686451
OpenAlexW4200307969

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.