ArticleScientific reports2023
Validating virtual administration of neuropsychological testing in Parkinson disease: a pilot study.
Article in Scientific reports, 2023. 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, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Development and Preliminary Validation of ORCA-PD, an Online Rapid Cognitive Assessment for Parkinson Disease: Mixed Methods Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- Clinical Outcome Assessments in Parkinson's Disease: A Scoping Review of Current Rating Scales and Future Needs.Movement disorders clinical practice · 2026Article
- Factors associated with severe neurological sequelae of COVID-19: findings from the multicenter COVID-BRAIN imaging cohort.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2026Article
- Short-term cognitive practice effects in Parkinson's disease: More than meets the eye.Parkinsonism & related disorders · 2025Article
- Assessment of verbal memory in Parkinson's disease utilizing a virtual reality-based Rey Auditory Verbal Learning Test.Scientific reports · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
- Update of
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
COVID-19 has highlighted the need for remote cognitive testing, but the reliability and validity of virtual cognitive testing in Parkinson disease (PD) is unknown. Therefore, we assessed PD participants enrolled in an observational, cognition-focused study with an extensive cognitive battery completed both in-person and via video conference close in time. Data for 35 PD participants with normal cognition to mild dementia were analyzed. Only one test (semantic verbal fluency) demonstrated a difference in score by administration type, with a significantly better score virtually. Only three tests demonstrated good reliability for in-person versus virtual testing, but reliability values for visit 1 versus visit 2 were similarly low overall. Trail Making Test B was successfully administered virtually to only 18 participants due to technical issues. Virtual and in-person cognitive testing generate similar scores at the group level, but with poor to moderate reliability for most tests. Mode of test administration, learning effects, and technical difficulties explained little of the low test-retest reliability, indicating possible significant short-term variability in cognitive performance in PD in general, which has implications for clinical care and research. In-person cognitive testing with a neuropsychologist remains the gold standard, and it remains to be determined if virtual cognitive testing is feasible in PD.
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.