ArticleAnnals of geriatric medicine and research2022
Cognitive Assessment by Telemedicine: Reliability and Agreement between Face-to-Face and Remote Videoconference-Based Cognitive Tests in Older Adults Attending a Memory Clinic.
Article in Annals of geriatric medicine and research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Caregiving experiences of older spouses with frailty: an exploratory qualitative study.International journal of qualitative studies on health and well-being · 2026Article
- Validity and Reliability of Smartphone-Based Cognitive Assessment in Older Adults.Annals of geriatric medicine and research · 2026Article
- Implementing Technology in Neuropsychological Assessments: A Scoping Review.Journal of medical systems · 2026Article
- Assessing the Equivalence of Telephone-MoCA and MoCA-22 in Healthy Adults.Dementia and neurocognitive disorders · 2025Article
- Evaluating working memory in young individuals with normal hearing through tele-assessment and traditional assessment: a comparative study.Frontiers in digital health · 2025Article
- Enhancing neuropsychological assessment clinical pathways in Parkinson's disease through the use of technology.Frontiers in digital health · 2025Article
- Remote fitness assessment in younger and middle-aged to older adults: a comparison between laboratory- and videoconference-based assessment of selected measures of physical and cognitive fitness.BMC sports science, medicine & rehabilitation · 2024Article
- Machine vision-based gait scan method for identifying cognitive impairment in older adults.Frontiers in aging neuroscience · 2024Article
- Remote Neuropscyhological Assessment: Teleneuropsychology.Noro psikiyatri arsivi · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has spurred the rapid adoption of telemedicine. However, the reproducibility of face-to-face (F2F) versus remote videoconference-based cognitive testing remains to be established. We assessed the reliability and agreement between F2F and remote administrations of the Abbreviated Mental Test (AMT), modified version of the Chinese Mini-Mental State Examination (mCMMSE), and Chinese Frontal Assessment Battery (CFAB) in older adults attending a memory clinic.
methodsThe participants underwent F2F followed by remote videoconference-based assessment by the same assessor within 3 weeks. Reliability was evaluated using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC; two-way mixed, absolute agreement), the mean difference between remote and F2F-based assessments using paired-sample t-tests, and agreement using Bland-Altman plots.
resultsFifty-six subjects (mean age, 76±5.4 years; 74% mild; 19% moderate dementia) completed the AMT and mCMMSE, of which 30 completed the CFAB. Good reliability was noted based on the ICC values-AMT: ICC=0.80, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.68-0.88; mCMMSE: ICC=0.80, 95% CI 0.63-0.88; CFAB: ICC=0.82, 95% CI 0.66-0.91. However, remote AMT and mCMMSE scores were higher compared to F2F-mean difference (i.e., remote minus F2F): AMT 0.3±1.1, p=0.03; mCMMSE 1.3±2.9, p=0.001. Significant differences were observed in the orientation and recall items of the mCMMSE and the similarities and conflicting instructions of CFAB. Bland-Altman plots indicated wide 95% limits of agreement (AMT -1.9 to 2.6; mCMMSE -4.3 to 6.9; CFAB -3.0 to 3.8), exceeding the a priori-defined levels of error.
conclusionWhile the remote and F2F cognitive assessments demonstrated good overall reliability, the test scores were higher when performed remotely compared to F2F. The discrepancies in agreement warrant attention to patient selection and environment optimization for the successful adaptation of telemedicine for cognitive assessment.
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.