ArticleJournal of the neurological sciences2023
Moving intra-individual variability (IIV) towards clinical utility: IIV measured using a commercial testing platform.
Article in Journal of the neurological sciences, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Review
- Characterizing intraindividual variability in bipolar disorder: links to cognition, white matter microstructure, and clinical variables.Psychological medicine · 2025Article
- Increased intraindividual variability (IIV) in reaction time is the earliest indicator of cognitive change in MS: A two-year observational study.International journal of clinical and health psychology : IJCHPArticle
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesIntra-individual variability (IIV), measured across repeated response times (RT) during continuous psychomotor tasks, is an early marker of cognitive change in the context of neurodegeneration. To advance IIV towards broader application in clinical research, we evaluated IIV from a commercial cognitive testing platform and compared it to the calculation approaches used in experimental cognitive studies.
methodsCognitive assessment was administered in participants with multiple sclerosis (MS) during the baseline of an unrelated study. Cogstate was used for computer-based measures providing three timed-trial tasks measuring simple (Detection; DET) and choice (Identification; IDN) RT and working memory (One-Back; ONB). IIV for each task was automatically output by the program (calculated as a log
resultsA total of n = 120 participants with MS aged 20-72 (Mean ± SD, 48.99 ± 12.09) completed the baseline cognitive measures. For each task, the interclass correlation coefficient was generated. Each ICC showed that LSD, CoV, ex-Gaussian, and regression methods clustered strongly (Average ICC for DET: 0.95 with 95% CI [0.93, 0.96]; Average ICC for IDN: 0.92 with 95% CI [0.88 to 0.93]; Average ICC for ONB: 0.93 with 95% CI [0.90 to 0.94]). Correlational analyses indicated the strongest correlation between LSD and CoV for all tasks (rs ≥ 0.94).
conclusionThe LSD was consistent with research-based methods for IIV calculations. These findings support the use of LSD for the future measurement of IIV for clinical studies.
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.