ArticleFrontiers in aging neuroscience2022
Correctness and response time distributions in the MemTrax continuous recognition task: Analysis of strategies and a reverse-exponential model.
Article in Frontiers in aging neuroscience, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Consumption of caffeine-containing beverages improves sustained attention and alertness but has no effect on strength or static muscular endurance.Journal of nutritional science · 2026Trial
- Article
- Toward digitally screening and profiling AD: A GAMLSS approach of MemTrax in China.Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association · 2024Article
- Episodic memory assessment: effects of sex and age on performance and response time during a continuous recognition task.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2024Article
- Brain health registry updates: An online longitudinal neuroscience platform.Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association · 2023Article
- Article
- Article
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
A critical issue in addressing medical conditions is measurement. Memory measurement is difficult, especially episodic memory, which is disrupted by many conditions. On-line computer testing can precisely measure and assess several memory functions. This study analyzed memory performances from a large group of anonymous, on-line participants using a continuous recognition task (CRT) implemented at https://memtrax.com. These analyses estimated ranges of acceptable performance and average response time (RT). For 344,165 presumed unique individuals completing the CRT a total of 602,272 times, data were stored on a server, including each correct response (HIT), Correct Rejection, and RT to the thousandth of a second. Responses were analyzed, distributions and relationships of these parameters were ascertained, and mean RTs were determined for each participant across the population. From 322,996 valid first tests, analysis of correctness showed that 63% of these tests achieved at least 45 correct (90%), 92% scored at or above 40 correct (80%), and 3% scored 35 correct (70%) or less. The distribution of RTs was skewed with 1% faster than 0.62 s, a median at 0.890 s, and 1% slower than 1.57 s. The RT distribution was best explained by a novel model, the reverse-exponential (RevEx) function. Increased RT speed was most closely associated with increased HIT accuracy. The MemTrax on-line memory test readily provides valid and reliable metrics for assessing individual episodic memory function that could have practical clinical utility for precise assessment of memory dysfunction in many conditions, including improvement or deterioration over time.
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.