ArticleFrontiers in digital health2022
Validation of a rapid remote digital test for impaired cognition using clinical dementia rating and mini-mental state examination: An observational research study.
Article in Frontiers in digital health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Spatial navigation as a digital marker for clinically differentiating cognitive impairment severity.Communications medicine · 2026Article
- Web-Based Application for Cognitive and Functional Assessments in Dementia Screening: Mixed Methods, User-Centered Development Approach.JMIR human factors · 2026Article
- Development and Validation of the Short-Form BrainOK: An Efficient Digital Screening Tool for Mild Cognitive Impairment.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Subjective brain fog: a four-dimensional characterization in 25,796 participants.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2024Article
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The Clinical Dementia Rating (CDR) and Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) are useful screening tools for mild cognitive impairment (MCI). However, these tests require qualified in-person supervision and the CDR can take up to 60 min to complete. We developed a digital cognitive screening test (M-CogScore) that can be completed remotely in under 5 min without supervision. We set out to validate M-CogScore in head-to-head comparisons with CDR and MMSE. Methods: To ascertain the validity of the M-CogScore, we enrolled participants as healthy controls or impaired cognition, matched for age, sex, and education. Participants completed the 30-item paper MMSE Second Edition Standard Version (MMSE-2), paper CDR, and smartphone-based M-CogScore. The digital M-CogScore test is based on time-normalised scores from smartphone-adapted Stroop (M-Stroop), digit-symbols (M-Symbols), and delayed recall tests (M-Memory). We used Spearman's correlation coefficient to determine the convergent validity between M-CogScore and the 30-item MMSE-2, and non-parametric tests to determine its discriminative validity with a CDR label of normal (CDR 0) or impaired cognition (CDR 0.5 or 1). M-CogScore was further compared to MMSE-2 using area under the receiver operating characteristic curves (AUC) with corresponding optimal cut-offs. Results: 72 participants completed all three tests. The M-CogScore correlated with both MMSE-2 (rho = 0.54, Conclusion: Digital screening tests such as M-CogScore are desirable to aid in rapid and remote clinical cognitive evaluations. M-CogScore was significantly correlated with established cognitive tests, including CDR and MMSE-2. M-CogScore can be taken remotely without supervision, is automatically scored, has less of a ceiling effect than the MMSE-2, and takes significantly less time to complete.
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.