ArticleDigital health
Focus groups on digital cognitive assessment in the context of Alzheimer's disease.
Article in Digital health. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Enhancing Alzheimer's disease diagnosis in primary care through targeted screening of people at risk of developing dementia - study design and feasibility assessment of the PREDEM primary care study.Alzheimer's research & therapy · 2026Article
- Clinical implementation of digital cognitive assessments - recommendations from Global CEO Initiative on Alzheimer's Disease.Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association · 2026Article
- Acceptable standards for clinic-based digital cognitive assessments: Recommendations from the Global CEO Initiative on Alzheimer's Disease.Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association · 2025Article
- Performance of Older Adults on the Digital Clock and Recall Test Compared to the Montreal Cognitive Assessment in Primary Care Settings.Journal of general internal medicine · 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
Introduction: Digital cognitive assessments (DCAs) may facilitate early recognition of cognitive decline in the context of Alzheimer's disease (AD). While DCAs are increasingly emerging, they are often not used in practice. We assessed facilitators and barriers of using DCAs according to older individuals and patients. Methods: In five focus groups, we presented three different DCAs to older individuals with unimpaired cognition ( Results: Three main themes were identified: (1) test motivation ('Do I want to know my brain health?'), facilitated by early disease recognition, while impeded by fear of dementia; (2) digital test suitability ('Do I want to use a Discussion: Participants recognized the added value of DCAs, and multiple factors were identified as facilitators and barriers for their use. Similar factors could be a barrier for one, yet facilitated others, underlining the need for a personalized approach. Strategies to minimize barriers and exploit facilitators would ultimately foster implementation.
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.