Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37624635›Full record

ArticleJournal of medical Internet research2023

A Novel, Expert-Endorsed, Neurocognitive Digital Assessment Tool for Addictive Disorders: Development and Validation Study.

Rico S C Lee, Lucy Albertella, Erynn Christensen, Chao Suo, Rebecca A Segrave, Maja Brydevall, Rebecca Kirkham, Chang Liu, Leonardo F Fontenelle, Samuel R Chamberlain and 2 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of medical Internet research, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
1.6field-weighted citation impact, top 17% 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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
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

12 authors at 5 institutions in 3 countries.

Rico S C LeeBrainPark, Turner Institute for Brain and Mental Health, Monash University, Clayton, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-8436-0190
Lucy AlbertellaBrainPark, Turner Institute for Brain and Mental Health, Monash University, Clayton, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-5232-6414
Erynn ChristensenBrainPark, Turner Institute for Brain and Mental Health, Monash University, Clayton, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-7260-184X
Chao SuoBrainPark, Turner Institute for Brain and Mental Health, Monash University, Clayton, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-9358-6690
Rebecca A SegraveBrainPark, Turner Institute for Brain and Mental Health, Monash University, Clayton, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-1839-0794
Maja BrydevallBrainPark, Turner Institute for Brain and Mental Health, Monash University, Clayton, Australia.ORCID 0009-0007-7909-4570
Rebecca KirkhamBrainPark, Turner Institute for Brain and Mental Health, Monash University, Clayton, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-3004-7219
Chang LiuBrainPark, Turner Institute for Brain and Mental Health, Monash University, Clayton, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-0324-8151
Leonardo F FontenelleBrainPark, Turner Institute for Brain and Mental Health, Monash University, Clayton, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-9075-8226
Samuel R ChamberlainDepartment of Psychiatry, University of Southampton, Southampton, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0001-7014-8121
Kristian RotaruBrainPark, Turner Institute for Brain and Mental Health, Monash University, Clayton, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-2570-2044
Murat YücelBrainPark, Turner Institute for Brain and Mental Health, Monash University, Clayton, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-4705-452X
Monash University · AUQIMR Berghofer Medical Research Institute · AUThe University of Melbourne · AUUniversidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro · BRUniversity of Southampton · GB

Funding

Wellcome Trust 110049Wellcome Trust 110049/Z/15/AWellcome Trust 110049/Z/15/Z
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMany people with harmful addictive behaviors may not meet formal diagnostic thresholds for a disorder. A dimensional approach, by contrast, including clinical and community samples, is potentially key to early detection, prevention, and intervention. Importantly, while neurocognitive dysfunction underpins addictive behaviors, established assessment tools for neurocognitive assessment are lengthy and unengaging, difficult to administer at scale, and not suited to clinical or community needs. The BrainPark Assessment of Cognition (BrainPAC) Project sought to develop and validate an engaging and user-friendly digital assessment tool purpose-built to comprehensively assess the main consensus-driven constructs underpinning addictive behaviors.

objectiveThe purpose of this study was to psychometrically validate a gamified battery of consensus-based neurocognitive tasks against standard laboratory paradigms, ascertain test-retest reliability, and determine their sensitivity to addictive behaviors (eg, alcohol use) and other risk factors (eg, trait impulsivity).

methodsGold standard laboratory paradigms were selected to measure key neurocognitive constructs (Balloon Analogue Risk Task [BART], Stop Signal Task [SST], Delay Discounting Task [DDT], Value-Modulated Attentional Capture [VMAC] Task, and Sequential Decision-Making Task [SDT]), as endorsed by an international panel of addiction experts; namely, response selection and inhibition, reward valuation, action selection, reward learning, expectancy and reward prediction error, habit, and compulsivity. Working with game developers, BrainPAC tasks were developed and validated in 3 successive cohorts (total N=600) and a separate test-retest cohort (N=50) via Mechanical Turk using a cross-sectional design.

resultsBrainPAC tasks were significantly correlated with the original laboratory paradigms on most metrics (r=0.18-0.63, P<.05). With the exception of the DDT k function and VMAC total points, all other task metrics across the 5 tasks did not differ between the gamified and nongamified versions (P>.05). Out of 5 tasks, 4 demonstrated adequate to excellent test-retest reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient 0.72-0.91, P<.001; except SDT). Gamified metrics were significantly associated with addictive behaviors on behavioral inventories, though largely independent of trait-based scales known to predict addiction risk.

conclusionsA purpose-built battery of digitally gamified tasks is sufficiently valid for the scalable assessment of key neurocognitive processes underpinning addictive behaviors. This validation provides evidence that a novel approach, purported to enhance task engagement, in the assessment of addiction-related neurocognition is feasible and empirically defensible. These findings have significant implications for risk detection and the successful deployment of next-generation assessment tools for substance use or misuse and other mental disorders characterized by neurocognitive anomalies related to motivation and self-regulation. Future development and validation of the BrainPAC tool should consider further enhancing convergence with established measures as well as collecting population-representative data to use clinically as normative comparisons.

Indexed as

Behavior, AddictiveAlcohol DrinkingCross-Sectional StudiesHumansReproducibility of Resultsaddictionaddictive behaviorsassessmentbrain healthcognitive neurosciencedevelopmentgame developergame developmentgamificationgamifiedgamified taskgamingmental disordermental healthneurocognitionneurocognitivepsychometricsoftwarevalidatevalidationvalidity

Identifiers

PMID37624635
PMCPMC7615064
OpenAlexW4386154032

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.