Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39515815›Full record

ArticleJMIR formative research2024

Sensor-Derived Measures of Motor and Cognitive Functions in People With Multiple Sclerosis Using Unsupervised Smartphone-Based Assessments: Proof-of-Concept Study.

Matthew Scaramozza, Aurélie Ruet, Patrizia A Chiesa, Laïtissia Ahamada, Emmanuel Bartholomé, Loïc Carment, Julie Charre-Morin, Gautier Cosne, Léa Diouf, Christine C Guo and 16 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR formative research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

26 authors.

Matthew Scaramozza *Biogen, Cambridge, MA, United States.ORCID 0000-0003-3738-459X
Aurélie Ruet *Department of Neurology, CHU de Bordeaux, Bordeaux, France.ORCID 0000-0002-0020-8739
Patrizia A ChiesaBiogen, Cambridge, MA, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-1606-9008
Laïtissia AhamadaAd Scientiam, Paris, France.ORCID 0009-0006-4296-0706
Emmanuel BartholoméBiogen, Cambridge, MA, United States.ORCID 0009-0007-1370-8197
Loïc CarmentAd Scientiam, Paris, France.ORCID 0000-0002-1358-2877
Julie Charre-MorinDepartment of Neurology, CHU de Bordeaux, Bordeaux, France.ORCID 0009-0005-3116-6630
Gautier CosneBiogen, Cambridge, MA, United States.ORCID 0009-0009-5802-1414
Léa DioufAd Scientiam, Paris, France.ORCID 0009-0005-6109-0817
Christine C GuoBiogen, Cambridge, MA, United States.ORCID 0000-0003-1530-0172
Adrien JuraverBiogen, Cambridge, MA, United States.ORCID 0009-0004-4251-9609
Christoph M KanzlerBiogen, Cambridge, MA, United States.ORCID 0000-0003-1214-8347
Angelos KaratsidisBiogen, Cambridge, MA, United States.ORCID 0000-0001-6474-9377
Claudia MazzàBiogen, Cambridge, MA, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-5215-1746
Joaquin Penalver-AndresBiogen, Cambridge, MA, United States.ORCID 0000-0001-8181-7538
Marta RuizBiogen, Paris, France.ORCID 0009-0007-7744-4207
Aurore SaubusseDepartment of Neurology, CHU de Bordeaux, Bordeaux, France.ORCID 0009-0001-0180-2844
Gabrielle SimoneauBiogen, Cambridge, MA, United States.ORCID 0000-0001-9310-6274
Alf ScotlandBiogen, Cambridge, MA, United States.ORCID 0000-0001-9590-8617
Zhaonan SunBiogen, Cambridge, MA, United States.ORCID 0000-0001-5333-4387
Minao TangBiogen, Cambridge, MA, United States.ORCID 0009-0003-3007-6874
Johan van BeekBiogen, Cambridge, MA, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-5641-0004
Lauren ZajacBiogen, Cambridge, MA, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-1642-4284
Shibeshih BelachewBiogen, Cambridge, MA, United States.ORCID 0000-0003-3976-1950
Bruno BrochetU1215 INSERM, University of Bordeaux, Bordeaux, France.ORCID 0000-0003-3824-2796
Nolan CampbellBiogen, Cambridge, MA, United States.ORCID 0009-0005-2746-5531

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSmartphones and wearables are revolutionizing the assessment of cognitive and motor function in neurological disorders, allowing for objective, frequent, and remote data collection. However, these assessments typically provide a plethora of sensor-derived measures (SDMs), and selecting the most suitable measure for a given context of use is a challenging, often overlooked problem.

objectiveThis analysis aims to develop and apply an SDM selection framework, including automated data quality checks and the evaluation of statistical properties, to identify robust SDMs that describe the cognitive and motor function of people with multiple sclerosis (MS).

methodsThe proposed framework was applied to data from a cross-sectional study involving 85 people with MS and 68 healthy participants who underwent in-clinic supervised and remote unsupervised smartphone-based assessments. The assessment provided high-quality recordings from cognitive, manual dexterity, and mobility tests, from which 47 SDMs, based on established literature, were extracted using previously developed and publicly available algorithms. These SDMs were first separately and then jointly screened for bias and normality by 2 expert assessors. Selected SDMs were then analyzed to establish their reliability, using an intraclass correlation coefficient and minimal detectable change at 95% CI. The convergence of selected SDMs with in-clinic MS functional measures and patient-reported outcomes was also evaluated.

resultsA total of 16 (34%) of the 47 SDMs passed the selection framework. All selected SDMs demonstrated moderate-to-good reliability in remote settings (intraclass correlation coefficient 0.5-0.85; minimal detectable change at 95% CI 19%-35%). Selected SDMs extracted from the smartphone-based cognitive test demonstrated good-to-excellent correlation (Spearman correlation coefficient, |ρ|>0.75) with the in-clinic Symbol Digit Modalities Test and fair correlation with Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) scores (0.25≤|ρ|<0.5). SDMs extracted from the manual dexterity tests showed either fair correlation (0.25≤|ρ|<0.5) or were not correlated (|ρ|<0.25) with the in-clinic 9-hole peg test and EDSS scores. Most selected SDMs from mobility tests showed fair correlation with the in-clinic timed 25-foot walk test and fair to moderate-to-good correlation (0.5<|ρ|≤0.75) with EDSS scores. SDM correlations with relevant patient-reported outcomes varied by functional domain, ranging from not correlated (cognitive test SDMs) to good-to-excellent correlation (|ρ|>0.75) for mobility test SDMs. Overall, correlations were similar when smartphone-based tests were performed in a clinic or remotely.

conclusionsReported results highlight that smartphone-based assessments are suitable tools to remotely obtain high-quality SDMs of cognitive and motor function in people with MS. The presented SDM selection framework promises to increase the interpretability and standardization of smartphone-based SDMs in people with MS, paving the way for their future use in interventional trials.

Indexed as

CognitionMultiple SclerosisSmartphoneAdultCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedProof of Concept StudyReproducibility of Resultscognitive functiondigital biomarkersmobile phonemotor functionmultiple sclerosissensor-derived measuresmartphone

Identifiers

PMID39515815
PMCPMC11584543

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.