Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38291734›Full record

ArticleArchives of clinical neuropsychology : the official journal of the National Academy of Neuropsychologists2024

Feasibility of Remote Administration of the Uniform Data Set-Version 3 for Assessment of Older Adults With Mild Cognitive Impairment and Alzheimer's Disease.

Bonnie C Sachs, Lauren A Latham, James R Bateman, Mary Jo Cleveland, Mark A Espeland, Eric Fischer, Sarah A Gaussoin, Iris Leng, Stephen R Rapp, Samantha Rogers and 4 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Archives of clinical neuropsychology : the official journal of the National Academy of Neuropsychologists, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

10 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Evaluation of In-person versus Remote Cognitive Assessment in Cognitively Unimpaired Older Adults via Regression-Based Change Analysis.Archives of clinical neuropsychology : the official journal of the National Academy of Neuropsychologists · 2025
    Article
  7. Observational
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. 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

14 authors.

Bonnie C SachsDepartment of Neurology, Wake Forest School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, NC, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-9352-7033
Lauren A LathamSection on Gerontology and Geriatric Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, Wake Forest School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, NC, USA.
James R BatemanDepartment of Neurology, Wake Forest School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, NC, USA.
Mary Jo ClevelandSection on Gerontology and Geriatric Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, Wake Forest School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, NC, USA.
Mark A EspelandSection on Gerontology and Geriatric Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, Wake Forest School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, NC, USA.
Eric FischerSection on Gerontology and Geriatric Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, Wake Forest School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, NC, USA.
Sarah A GaussoinDepartment of Biostatistics and Data Science, Wake Forest School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, NC, USA.
Iris LengDepartment of Biostatistics and Data Science, Wake Forest School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, NC, USA.
Stephen R RappDepartment of Psychiatry and Behavioral Medicine, Wake Forest School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, NC, USA.
Samantha RogersSection on Gerontology and Geriatric Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, Wake Forest School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, NC, USA.
Heather M ShappellDepartment of Biostatistics and Data Science, Wake Forest School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, NC, USA.
Benjamin J WilliamsDepartment of Neurology, Wake Forest School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, NC, USA.
Mia YangSection on Gerontology and Geriatric Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, Wake Forest School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, NC, USA.
Suzanne CraftSection on Gerontology and Geriatric Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, Wake Forest School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, NC, USA.

Funding

Wake Forest Claude D. Pepper OAIC - RenewalP30AG021332 · NIA · WAKE FOREST UNIVERSITY HEALTH SCIENCES · PI Jamie Nicole Justice · 2002 to 2026
$36.4M
Wake Forest University School of Medicine Alzheimer's Disease Research CenterP30AG072947 · NIA · WAKE FOREST UNIVERSITY HEALTH SCIENCES · PI SUZANNE CRAFT · 2021 to 2026
$24.3M
Wake Forest Alzheimer's Disease Core CenterP30AG049638 · NIA · WAKE FOREST UNIVERSITY HEALTH SCIENCES · PI RAPP, STEPHEN R · 2016 to 2020
$12.2M
NIA NIH HHS P30 AG021332NIA NIH HHS P30 AG049638NIA NIH HHS P30 AG072947
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveAssess the feasibility and concurrent validity of a modified Uniform Data Set version 3 (UDSv3) for remote administration for individuals with normal cognition (NC), mild cognitive impairment (MCI), and early dementia.

methodParticipants (N = 93) (age: 72.8 [8.9] years; education: 15.6 [2.5] years; 72% female; 84% White) were enrolled from the Wake Forest ADRC. Portions of the UDSv3 cognitive battery, plus the Rey Auditory Verbal Learning Test, were completed by telephone or video within ~6 months of participant's in-person visit. Adaptations for phone administration (e.g., Oral Trails for Trail Making Test [TMT] and Blind Montreal Cognitive Assessment [MoCA] for MoCA) were made. Participants reported on the pleasantness, difficulty, and preference for each modality. Staff provided validity ratings for assessments. Participants' remote data were adjudicated by cognitive experts blinded to the in person-diagnosis (NC [N = 44], MCI [N = 35], Dementia [N = 11], or other [N = 3]).

resultsRemote assessments were rated as pleasant as in-person assessments by 74% of participants and equally difficult by 75%. Staff validity rating (video = 92%; phone = 87.5%) was good. Concordance between remote/in-person scores was generally moderate to good (r = .3 -.8; p < .05) except for TMT-A/OTMT-A (r = .3; p > .05). Agreement between remote/in-person adjudicated cognitive status was good (k = .61-.64).

conclusionsWe found preliminary evidence that older adults, including those with cognitive impairment, can be assessed remotely using a modified UDSv3 research battery. Adjudication of cognitive status that relies on remotely collected data is comparable to classifications using in-person assessments.

Indexed as

Alzheimer DiseaseCognitive DysfunctionFeasibility StudiesNeuropsychological TestsAgedAged, 80 and overFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedReproducibility of ResultsAlzheimer’s diseaseDementiaMild cognitive impairment

Identifiers

PMID38291734
PMCPMC11447737

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.