SynthesisJournal of neurology2024
eHealth tools to assess the neurological function for research, in absence of the neurologist - a systematic review, part I (software).
Synthesis in Journal of neurology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Shaping the Future of DHT Assessment: Insights on Industry Challenges, Developer Needs, and a Harmonized, European HTA Framework.Journal of market access & health policy · 2025Article
- Utilising accessible and reproducible neurological assessments in clinical studies: Insights from use of the Neurological Impairment Scale in the multi-centre COVID-CNS study.Clinical medicine (London, England) · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundNeurological disorders remain a worldwide concern due to their increasing prevalence and mortality, combined with the lack of available treatment, in most cases. Exploring protective and risk factors associated with the development of neurological disorders will allow for improving prevention strategies. However, ascertaining neurological outcomes in population-based studies can be both complex and costly. The application of eHealth tools in research may contribute to lowering the costs and increase accessibility. The aim of this systematic review is to map existing eHealth tools assessing neurological signs and/or symptoms for epidemiological research.
methodsFour search engines (PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus & EBSCOHost) were used to retrieve articles on the development, validation, or implementation of eHealth tools to assess neurological signs and/or symptoms. The clinical and technical properties of the software tools were summarised. Due to high numbers, only software tools are presented here.
findingsA total of 42 tools were retrieved. These captured signs and/or symptoms belonging to four neurological domains: cognitive function, motor function, cranial nerves, and gait and coordination. An additional fifth category of composite tools was added. Most of the tools were available in English and were developed for smartphone device, with the remaining tools being available as web-based platforms. Less than half of the captured tools were fully validated, and only approximately half were still active at the time of data collection.
interpretationThe identified tools often presented limitations either due to language barriers or lack of proper validation. Maintenance and durability of most tools were low. The present mapping exercise offers a detailed guide for epidemiologists to identify the most appropriate eHealth tool for their research.
fundingThe current study was funded by a PhD position at the University of Groningen. No additional funding was acquired.
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.