ArticleBehavior research methods2025
Criterion validity of five open-source app-based cognitive and sensory tasks in an Australian adult life course sample aged 18 to 82: Labs without walls.
Article in Behavior research methods, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Cohort profile: the Resilient Minds national study of mental health and cognitive resilience in community dwelling adults aged 18 to 93.Frontiers in digital health · 2026Article
- Associations between objective hearing function and subjective views of aging.European journal of ageing · 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
With recent technical advances, many cognitive and sensory tasks have been adapted for smartphone testing. This study aimed to assess the criterion validity of a subset of self-administered, open-source app-based cognitive and sensory tasks by comparing test performance to lab-based alternatives. An in-person baseline was completed by 43 participants (aged 21 to 82) from the larger Labs without Walls project (Brady et al., 2023) to compare the self-administered, app-based tasks with researcher-administered equivalents. 4 preset tasks sourced from Apple's ResearchKit (Spatial Memory, Trail Making Test, Stroop Test, and dBHL Tone Audiometry) and 1 custom-built task (Ishihara Color Deficiency Test) were compared. All tasks except the Spatial Memory task demonstrated high comparability to the researcher-administered version. Specifically, the Trail Making Tests were strongly correlated (.77 and .78 for parts A and B, respectively), Stroop correlations ranged from .77 to .89 and the Ishihara tasks were moderately correlated (r = .69). ICCs for the Audiometry task ranged from .56 to .96 (Moderate to Excellent) with 83% sensitivity and 100% specificity. Bland-Altman plots revealed a mean bias between -5.35 to 9.67 dB for each ear and frequency with an overall bias of 3.02 and 1.98 for the left and right ears, respectively, within the minimum testing interval. Furthermore, all app-based tasks were significantly correlated with age. These results offer preliminary evidence of the validity of four open-source cognitive and sensory tasks with implications for effective remote testing in non-lab settings.
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.