ArticleScientific reports2025
Predictive value of an unsupervised web-based assessment of the neuropsychological function.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Neuropsychological assessment has to consider the subjective and objective functional deficits of help-seeking individuals in several cognitive domains. Due to time constraints in clinical practice, several web-based approaches have been developed. The current study examined whether functional deficits in the mnestic and attentive domain can be predicted based on an unsupervised self-administered online assessment neuropsychological online screening (NOS): This screening includes self-reports and psychometric memory tests (face-name association, visual short-term memory). Data of help-seeking individuals (n = 213, mean age: 48.2 years) running an extensive in-person assessment were analyzed. A functional deficit in at least one cognitive domain was detected in 48 individuals. This classification was supported by the preceding online screening (sensitivity = 0.75, specificity = 0.80), and a linear regression model identified two significant predictors (free recall performance, form discrimination in visual short-term memory). The predictive quality was enhanced for individuals with selective deficits in the mnestic domain (n = 23: sensitivity = 0.78 and specificity = 0.78) as compared to the attentive domain (n = 25: sensitivity = 0.68 and specificity = 0.75). Our results show that a neuropsychological in-person assessment cannot be replaced by an unsupervised self-administered online test. However, a specific pattern of results in the online test might indicate the necessity of an extensive assessment in help-seeking individuals.
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.