Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35995786›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2022

Unveiling Trail Making Test: visual and manual trajectories indexing multiple executive processes.

Ignacio Linari, Gustavo E Juantorena, Agustín Ibáñez, Agustín Petroni, Juan E Kamienkowski

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 28 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
28citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
5.4field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

28 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 51 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Effects of the SGLT2 inhibitor dapagliflozin in early Alzheimer's disease: A randomized controlled trial.Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association · 2025
    Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. ReacStick: Evaluating Executive Function Independent From Level of Education.American journal of physical medicine & rehabilitation · 2026
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. 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

5 authors at 3 institutions in 5 countries.

Ignacio Linari *Laboratorio de Inteligencia Artificial Aplicada, Instituto de Ciencias de la Computación, Facultad de Ciencias Exactas y Naturales, Universidad de Buenos Aires - CONICET, Buenos Aires, Argentina.
Gustavo E Juantorena *Laboratorio de Inteligencia Artificial Aplicada, Instituto de Ciencias de la Computación, Facultad de Ciencias Exactas y Naturales, Universidad de Buenos Aires - CONICET, Buenos Aires, Argentina.
Agustín IbáñezCognitive Neuroscience Center (CNC), Universidad de San Andrés, and National Scientific and Technical Research Council (CONICET), Buenos Aires, Argentina.
Agustín PetroniLaboratorio de Inteligencia Artificial Aplicada, Instituto de Ciencias de la Computación, Facultad de Ciencias Exactas y Naturales, Universidad de Buenos Aires - CONICET, Buenos Aires, Argentina.
Juan E KamienkowskiLaboratorio de Inteligencia Artificial Aplicada, Instituto de Ciencias de la Computación, Facultad de Ciencias Exactas y Naturales, Universidad de Buenos Aires - CONICET, Buenos Aires, Argentina. juank@dc.uba.ar.
Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas · ARTrinity College Dublin · IEUniversity of Gothenburg · SE

Funding

US-South American Initiative for Genetic-Neural-Behavioral Interactions in Human Neurodegenerative ResearchR01AG057234 · NIA · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN FRANCISCO · PI Claudia Duran-Aniotz, Agustin M. Ibanez · 2019 to 2026
$6.1M
Alzheimer's Association GBHI ALZ UK-20-639295Alzheimer's Association SG-20-725707NIA NIH HHS R01 AG057234
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The Trail Making Test (TMT) is one of the most popular neuropsychological tests for executive functions (EFs) assessment. It presents several strengths: it is sensitive to executive dysfunction, it is easy to understand, and has a short administration. However, it has important limitations. First, the underlying EFs articulated during the task are not well discriminated, which makes it a test with low specificity. Second, the pen-and-paper version presents one trial per condition which introduces high variability. Third, only the total time is quantified, which does not allow for a detailed analysis. Fourth, it has a fixed spatial configuration per condition. We designed a computerised version of the TMT to overcome its main limitations and evaluated it in a group of neurotypical adults. Eye and hand positions are measured with high resolution over several trials, and spatial configuration is controlled. Our results showed a very similar performance profile compared to the traditional TMT. Moreover, it revealed differences in eye movements between parts A and B. Most importantly, based on hand and eye movements, we found an internal working memory measure that showed an association to a validated working memory task. Additionally, we proposed another internal measure as a potential marker of inhibitory control. Our results showed that EFs can be studied in more detail using traditional tests combined with powerful digital setups. The cTMT showed potential use in older adult populations and patients with EFs disorders.

Indexed as

Executive FunctionMemory, Short-TermAgedHumansNeuropsychological TestsTrail Making Test

Identifiers

PMID35995786
PMCPMC9395513
OpenAlexW3201963315

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.