ArticleBMJ open2024
Protocol: Prospective evaluation of feasibility, added value and satisfaction of remote digital self-assessment for mild cognitive impairment in routine care with the neotivCare app.
Article in BMJ open, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Acceptance of Unsupervised App-Based Cognitive Assessment in Outpatient Care: An Implementation Study.JMIR formative research · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionTimely diagnosis of mild cognitive impairment (MCI) in Alzheimer's disease is crucial for early interventions, but its implementation is often challenging due to the complexity and time burden of required cognitive assessments. To address these challenges, the usability of new unsupervised digital remote assessment tools needs to be validated in a care context. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This multicentric healthcare research evaluation survey, re.cogni.ze, aims to evaluate physician satisfaction with a remote digital assessment solution (neotivCare) in primary and specialised routine care in Germany. Over a period of 22 months, physicians in different regions of Germany will recommend the application (app) to approximately 1000 patients for a 12-week self-assessment of cognition. The primary endpoint is the evaluation of physicians' and patients' overall satisfaction with neotivCare and with neuropsychological questionnaires/standard procedures using a Likert scale, while secondary endpoints include user-friendliness, qualitative assessment of acceptance and potential improvements on medical routine services. The study also aims to evaluate the proportion of physicians or patients attributing added value to neotivCare compared with standard paper-pencil tests. The study results will provide insights into the feasibility, efficiency and acceptance of new digital tools for MCI diagnosis in routine care. The re.cogni.ze survey will thus provide proof-of-concept information for the implementation of remote digital cognitive assessment apps for MCI into medical routine care. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study was approved by the ethics committee of the State Medical Association (Landesärztekammer) Baden-Württemberg, (F-2021-161) as the leading committee and nine ethics committees local to the participating healthcare professionals (Lower Saxony, North Rhine, Westphalia-Lippe, Hesse, Bremen, Berlin, University of Göttingen, Charite, University of Rostock). The results can be shared (upon reasonable quest) to improve routine clinical processes and holistic approaches.
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.