ArticleScientific reports2024
Participation and engagement in online cognitive testing.
Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Subjective Memory Impairment in the General Adult Population: Associations With Early-Life Cognition, Concurrent Objective Memory, Dementia Risk Factors.European journal of neurology · 2026Article
- An online population-representative longitudinal cognitive dataset from the Understanding America Study.Scientific data · 2026Article
- Cohort Profile Update: The Norwegian Mother, Father and Child Cohort (MoBa).International journal of epidemiology · 2025Article
- Participation of under-represented communities in an online cognitive ageing platform and predictors of willingness to be contacted for future research.BMJ public health · 2025Article
- Mapping cognitive diversity in older adults through community-based digital screening via mobile devices: a cross-sectional latent class analysis.Frontiers in digital health · 2025Article
- Online46: Online cognitive assessments in elderly cohorts-The British 1946 birth cohort case study.Alzheimer's & dementia (Amsterdam, Netherlands)Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Web-based testing of cognitive abilities allows for large-scale assessments without geographical constraints. Yet, the extent to which it can reach populations beyond the typical demographic groups recruited for cognitive studies is unclear. This study focused on comparing the characteristics of individuals from a general population study (HUNT4) who chose to participate in a cognitive study (HUNT4-Hjernetrim) with those who did not. Additionally, we investigated participants' engagement and user experience. We obtained data on socio-demographics, health conditions (both physical and mental), self-reported cognitive or learning difficulties, and lifestyle factors of Hjernetrim participants and non-participants from the HUNT4 database. Hjernetrim involved 13 cognitive tests, administered through the online platform Memoro. We used logistic regressions to assess participation biases and linear regressions to assess participants' engagement and user experience. Of 65,851 HUNT4 participants invited via regular mail to Hjernetrim, 5634 (9.4%, aged 13-97, 54% women) participated. The best represented in the sample were 50-79-year-olds, women, tertiary educated, living alone, from urban areas, not occupationally active, and reporting memory complaints. Individuals who were aged 80+, had motor or vision impairments, and teenagers with learning disabilities, were underrepresented. Participants were more likely to have mental health problems, have or survived cancer and less likely to have cardiovascular disease. Participants logged on mainly during weekdays, the preferred time of day varied by age. On average, participants used 42 min and completed 78% of the tasks. Using PCs provided the most complete data. In terms of user experiences, 65% were positive while 14% were negative or reported technical difficulties. Overall, the study demonstrated that web-based methodology allowed for a relatively well-represented sample that included groups typically difficult to reach. The presence of somatic and mental diseases had a variable influence on participation. Participants finished most tests and reported positive experiences overall.
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.