Observational studyJournal of neurology2025
CoGames: Development of an adaptive smartphone-based and gamified monitoring tool for cognitive function in Multiple Sclerosis.
Observational study in Journal of neurology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05009160 (DreaMS - Development of Digital Biomarkers in Multiple Sclerosis - Validation Study 1), which is not on this map. Cited by 3 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.
DreaMS - Development of Digital Biomarkers in Multiple Sclerosis - Validation Study 1
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Computer-Assisted Performance-Based Assessment for Mental Health: A Scoping Review.PsyCh journal · 2026Article
- Monitoring cognition in multiple sclerosis via adaptive smartphone games-first insights from a validation study.Frontiers in digital health · 2026Article
- Biomarkers of Alzheimer's disease modification using adaptive cognitive assessments to improve responsiveness-a simulation study.Frontiers in neuroscience · 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimAs part of the development of a smartphone-based app for monitoring MS disease activity and progression (dreaMS, NCT05009160), we developed six gamified tests with multiple difficulty levels as a monitoring tool for cognition. This study quantified the relative difficulty between levels and investigated their reliability, ability to depict practice effects, and user acceptance.
methodsHealthy volunteers played each game, covering five cognitive domains, twice per day for 11 consecutive days. Linear mixed models determined the relative difficulty of the levels. Spearman's correlation of the two daily repetitions measured test-retest reliability. Difficulty increased daily except for days 2, 6, and 11, when the easiest level ("Beginner") was repeated to estimate practice effects. Participants rated enjoyment and other components of acceptance on a 5-point scale.
resultsWe included 82 participants from April to July 2023 in Basel, Switzerland, of which 76 (51 female, age: 40.3 ± 13.9 years, range 18-69) completed the study according to protocol. Generally, mean performances decreased with higher difficulty levels. Across all levels of all games, the median test-retest correlation was 0.825 (range of medians 0.55-0.9). Mean performance in level "Beginner" improved across all games. The mean enjoyment rating was 3.9 (range: 3.1-4.3).
conclusionOur study showed that the CoGames yield reliable measures across different cognitive domains and difficulty levels and were enjoyable to play. The observed practice effects must be considered, but also indicate sensitivity to change. These results support the hypothesis that adaptive gamified digital tests can serve as a reliable and well-accepted monitoring tool of cognition in PwMS.
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.