ArticleFrontiers in psychology2023
The necessary, albeit belated, transition to computerized cognitive assessment.
Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Can Functional Cognitive Assessments for Children/Adolescents Be Transformed into Digital Platforms? A Conceptual Review.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- The Real-World Usability, Feasibility, and Performance Distributions of Deploying a Digital Toolbox of Computerized Assessments to Remotely Evaluate Brain Health: Development and Usability Study.JMIR formative research · 2024Article
- Cognitive decline monitoring through a web-based application.Frontiers in aging neuroscience · 2023Article
- Validity and reliability of a digital solution for cognitive assessment: The Brain on Track®.Digital healthArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Cognitive assessment is a common and daily process in educational, clinical, or research settings, among others. Currently, most professionals use classic pencil-and-paper screenings, tests, and assessment batteries. However, as the SARS-CoV-2 health crisis has shown, the pencil-and-paper format is becoming increasingly outdated and it is necessary to transition to new technologies, using computerized cognitive assessments (CCA). This article discusses the advantages, disadvantages, and implications of this necessary transition that professionals should face in the immediate future, and encourages careful adoption of this change to ensure a smooth transition.
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.