Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37013590›Full record

ArticleAlzheimer's research & therapy2023

Validation study of "Santé-Cerveau", a digital tool for early cognitive changes identification.

Constance Lesoil, Stéphanie Bombois, Octave Guinebretiere, Marion Houot, Mahsa Bahrami, Marcel Levy, Rémy Genthon, Frédérique Bozon, Heidy Jean-Marie, Stéphane Epelbaum and 3 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Alzheimer's research & therapy, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
2.0field-weighted citation impact, top 14% 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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. REAL AD-Validation of a realistic screening approach for early Alzheimer's disease.Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association · 2024
    Article
  6. Review
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

13 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

Constance Lesoil *Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris (AP-HP), Department of Neurology, Institute of Memory and Alzheimer's Disease (IM2A), Paris, France.
Stéphanie Bombois *Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris (AP-HP), Department of Neurology, Institute of Memory and Alzheimer's Disease (IM2A), Paris, France.
Octave GuinebretiereAssistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris (AP-HP), Department of Neurology, Institute of Memory and Alzheimer's Disease (IM2A), Paris, France.
Marion HouotAssistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris (AP-HP), Department of Neurology, Institute of Memory and Alzheimer's Disease (IM2A), Paris, France.
Mahsa BahramiAssistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris (AP-HP), Department of Neurology, Institute of Memory and Alzheimer's Disease (IM2A), Paris, France.
Marcel LevyAssistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris (AP-HP), Department of Neurology, Institute of Memory and Alzheimer's Disease (IM2A), Paris, France.
Rémy GenthonAssistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris (AP-HP), Department of Neurology, Institute of Memory and Alzheimer's Disease (IM2A), Paris, France.
Frédérique BozonAssistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris (AP-HP), Department of Neurology, Institute of Memory and Alzheimer's Disease (IM2A), Paris, France.
Heidy Jean-MarieMindMaze France, Paris, France.
Stéphane EpelbaumAssistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris (AP-HP), Department of Neurology, Institute of Memory and Alzheimer's Disease (IM2A), Paris, France.
Pierre FoulonMindMaze France, Paris, France.
Nicolas VillainAssistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris (AP-HP), Department of Neurology, Institute of Memory and Alzheimer's Disease (IM2A), Paris, France.
Bruno DuboisAssistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris (AP-HP), Department of Neurology, Institute of Memory and Alzheimer's Disease (IM2A), Paris, France. bruno.dubois@aphp.fr.
Assistance Publique – Hôpitaux de Paris · FRInstitut du Cerveau · FRSorbonne Université · FRUniversité Paris 1 Panthéon-Sorbonne · FRUniversité Paris Cité · FR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThere is a need for a reliable, easy-to-use, widely available, and validated tool for timely cognitive impairment identification. We created a computerized cognitive screening tool (Santé-Cerveau digital tool (SCD-T)) including validated questionnaires and the following neuropsychological tests: 5 Word Test (5-WT) for episodic memory, Trail Making Test (TMT) for executive functions, and a number coding test (NCT) adapted from the Digit Symbol Substitution Test for global intellectual efficiency. This study aimed to evaluate the performance of SCD-T to identify cognitive deficit and to determine its usability.

methodsThree groups were constituted including 65 elderly Controls, 64 patients with neurodegenerative diseases (NDG): 50 AD and 14 non-AD, and 20 post-COVID-19 patients. The minimum MMSE score for inclusion was 20. Association between computerized SCD-T cognitive tests and their standard equivalent was assessed using Pearson's correlation coefficients. Two algorithms (a simple clinician-guided algorithm involving the 5-WT and the NCT; and a machine learning classifier based on 8 scores from the SCD-T tests extracted from a multiple logistic regression model, and data from the SCD-T questionnaires) were evaluated. The acceptability of SCD-T was investigated through a questionnaire and scale.

resultsAD and non-AD participants were older (mean ± standard deviation (SD): 72.61 ± 6.79 vs 69.91 ± 4.86 years old, p = 0.011) and had a lower MMSE score (Mean difference estimate ± standard error: 1.74 ± 0.14, p < 0.001) than Controls; post-COVID-19 patients were younger than Controls (mean ± SD: 45.07 ± 11.36 years old, p < 0.001). All the computerized SCD-T cognitive tests were significantly associated with their reference version. In the pooled Controls and NDG group, the correlation coefficient was 0.84 for verbal memory, -0.60 for executive functions, and 0.72 for global intellectual efficiency. The clinician-guided algorithm demonstrated 94.4% ± 3.8% sensitivity and 80.5% ± 8.7% specificity, and the machine learning classifier 96.8% ± 3.9% sensitivity and 90.7% ± 5.8% specificity. The acceptability of SCD-T was good to excellent.

conclusionsWe demonstrate the high accuracy of SCD-T in screening cognitive disorders and its good acceptance even in individuals with prodromal and mild dementia stages. SCD-T would be useful in primary care to faster refer subjects with significant cognitive impairment (and limit unnecessary referrals) to specialized consultation, improve the AD care pathway and the pre-screening in clinical trials.

Indexed as

Alzheimer DiseaseCognition DisordersCognitive DysfunctionCOVID-19AdultAgedCognitionHumansMiddle AgedNeuropsychological TestsAlzheimer’s diseaseCare planCognitive complaintCOVID-19Digital toolEarly diagnosisMemoryMild dementia

Identifiers

PMID37013590
PMCPMC10068729
OpenAlexW4362522688

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.