Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36339192›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in public health2022

People's interest in brain health testing: Findings from an international, online cross-sectional survey.

Rebecca B Carver, Nanna Alida Grit Fredheim, Athanasia Monika Mowinckel, Klaus P Ebmeier, Barbara Bodorkos Friedman, Tor Atle Rosness, Christian A Drevon, Sana Suri, William F C Baaré, Eniko Zsoldos and 10 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in public health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
1.0field-weighted citation impact, top 28% 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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Quantification of practice effects in a self-administered online cognitive pre-screening test.Neurological sciences : official journal of the Italian Neurological Society and of the Italian Society of Clinical Neurophysiology · 2026
    Observational
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Stakeholder engagement in European brain research: Experiences of the Lifebrain consortium.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2023
    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

20 authors at 10 institutions in 7 countries.

Rebecca B CarverDepartment of Communication, Norwegian Institute of Public Health, Oslo, Norway.
Nanna Alida Grit FredheimSchool of Communication, Leadership and Marketing, Kristiania University College, Oslo, Norway.
Athanasia Monika MowinckelDepartment of Psychology, Center for Lifespan Changes in Brain and Cognition, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway.
Klaus P EbmeierDepartment of Psychiatry, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom.
Barbara Bodorkos FriedmanDepartment of Psychology, Center for Lifespan Changes in Brain and Cognition, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway.
Tor Atle RosnessReviews and Health Technology Assessments Cluster, Norwegian Institute of Public Health, Oslo, Norway.
Christian A DrevonDepartment Nutrition, Faculty of Medicine, Institute Basic Medical Sciences, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway.
Sana SuriDepartment of Psychiatry, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom.
William F C BaaréDanish Research Centre for Magnetic Resonance, Centre for Functional and Diagnostic Imaging and Research, Copenhagen University Hospital Amager and Hvidovre, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Eniko ZsoldosDepartment of Psychiatry, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom.
Cristina Solé-PadullésDepartment of Medicine, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences & Institute of Neurosciences, University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain.
David Bartrés-FazDepartment of Medicine, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences & Institute of Neurosciences, University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain.
Paolo GhislettaFaculty of Psychology and Educational Sciences, University of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland.
Laura NawijnDepartment of Psychiatry, Amsterdam Neuroscience, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands.
Sandra DüzelCenter for Lifespan Psychology, Max Planck Institute for Human Development, Berlin, Germany.
Kathrine Skak MadsenDanish Research Centre for Magnetic Resonance, Centre for Functional and Diagnostic Imaging and Research, Copenhagen University Hospital Amager and Hvidovre, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Anders M FjellDepartment of Psychology, Center for Lifespan Changes in Brain and Cognition, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway.
Ulman LindenbergerCenter for Lifespan Psychology, Max Planck Institute for Human Development, Berlin, Germany.
Kristine B WalhovdDepartment of Psychology, Center for Lifespan Changes in Brain and Cognition, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway.
Isabelle Budin-LjøsneDepartment of Food Safety, Norwegian Institute of Public Health, Oslo, Norway.
University of Oslo · NONorwegian Institute of Public Health · NOCopenhagen University Hospital · DKMax Planck Institute for Human Development · DEUniversitat de Barcelona · ESUniversity of Oxford · GBHøyskolen Kristiania · NOUniversity of Geneva · CHVrije Universiteit Amsterdam · NLWellcome Centre for Integrative Neuroimaging · GB

Funding

Medical Research Council G1001354
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Brain health entails mental wellbeing and cognitive health in the absence of brain disorders. The past decade has seen an explosion of tests, cognitive and biological, to predict various brain conditions, such as Alzheimer's Disease. In line with these current developments, we investigated people's willingness and reasons to-or not to-take a hypothetical brain health test to learn about risk of developing a brain disease, in a cross-sectional multilanguage online survey. The survey was part of the Global Brain Health Survey, open to the public from 4th June 2019 to 31st August 2020. Respondents were largely recruited via European brain councils and research organizations. 27,590 people responded aged 18 years or older and were predominantly women (71%), middle-aged or older (>40 years; 83%), and highly educated (69%). Responses were analyzed to explore the relationship between demographic variables and responses. Results: We found high public interest in brain health testing: over 91% would definitely or probably take a brain health test and 86% would do so even if it gave information about a disease that cannot be treated or prevented. The main reason for taking a test was the ability to respond if one was found to be at risk of brain disease, such as changing lifestyle, seeking counseling or starting treatment. Higher interest in brain health testing was found in men, respondents with lower education levels and those with poor self-reported cognitive health. Conclusion: High public interest in brain health and brain health testing in certain segments of society, coupled with an increase of commercial tests entering the market, is likely to put pressure on public health systems to inform the public about brain health testing in years to come.

Indexed as

BrainBrain DiseasesCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedSelf ReportSurveys and QuestionnairesAlzheimer's diseasebrain healthmental healthpredictive testingpublic healthpublic perspectivessurveywellbeing

Identifiers

PMID36339192
PMCPMC9631023
OpenAlexW4306861655

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.