ArticleBMJ open2022
Is the analogue cognitive test from the ISPOCD equivalent to the digital cognitive test Mindmore? A protocol for a randomised cross-over study including qualitative interviews with self-reported healthy seniors.
Article in BMJ open, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Targeting Ferroptosis Pathways for Synaptic Protection in Sevoflurane-Induced Cognitive Impairment: A Nanomedicine Approach.CNS neuroscience & therapeutics · 2026Review
- Comparing analog and digital neurocognitive tests with older adults: a study of the ISPOCD battery vs. a digital test battery from Mindmore.BMC geriatrics · 2024Article
- Article
- Usability of the Mayo Test Drive remote self-administered web-based cognitive screening battery in adults aged 35-100 with and without cognitive impairment.Journal of clinical and experimental neuropsychologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionPostoperative cognitive decline affects cognitive domains such as executive functions, memory, concentration and information processing. The analogue neuropsychological test developed by the International Study Group of Postoperative Cognitive Dysfunction (ISPOCD) is a well-established test for assessing cognitive performance. However, analogue tests are time-consuming, rarely cost-effective and can be at risk of administration bias. Digital solutions are comparable to analogue ones, have higher degrees of compliance and enable more standardised execution than analogue tests. Currently, there is a lack of recommendations for clinical evaluation of the patient's cognition in the perioperative setting, standard care usually means no cognitive assessments prior or after the surgery. There is a need to find an equivalent neuropsychological test to the ISPOCD to make it accessible and easier to implement in a clinical context for perioperative patients. This study aims to examine how healthy seniors perform on two neuropsychological tests, analogue versus digital and measure equivalency between tests with correlation analysis. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This study will use a randomised cross-over design, including qualitative interviews regarding test experiences. Healthy participants ≥60 years of age will be eligible to participate in the study. Cognitive function will be measured by using the ISPOCD test and the Mindmore digital test. The participants will self-report depressive symptoms with the Geriatric Depression Scale-15, user experience of the digital test using a modified version of the System Usability Scale and answer questionnaires targeting their experiences after the tests. Furthermore, according to the Swedish Quality of Recovery Scale, self-reported concentration difficulties will also be measured. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study has been approved by the Swedish Ethical Review Authority (Dnr 2021-05486-01) and will follow the principles outlined in the 1964 Helsinki Declaration and its later amendments. Results from this study will be disseminated in peer-reviewed journals, at scientific conferences, and in social media. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: 2021-01095; ClinicalTrials.gov.
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.