ArticleInternational journal of methods in psychiatric research2025
Psychometric Properties of MyCog 2.0: A Human-Centered Cognitive Screening Tool for Older Adults.
Article in International journal of methods in psychiatric research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesSelf-administered, user-friendly apps that can detect initial symptoms of cognitive impairment have enormous potential to improve early detection of cognitive decline. We examine the psychometric properties of the redesigned version of MyCog, MyCog 2.0, an app-based tool for older adults that assesses executive function and episodic memory. MyCog 2.0 aims to improve usability while maintaining the psychometric validity demonstrated in the original version.
methodsFeedback from clinicians and patients on MyCog was gathered to inform the human-centered design improvements of MyCog 2.0. To assess the psychometric properties of the improved tool, data from a community sample (n = 200; mean age = 73 years) who had completed MyCog 2.0 were compared to an age-matched sample who had completed the original MyCog. Internal consistency and construct validity were evaluated via confirmatory factor analysis. Bayesian differential item functioning was employed to evaluate the evidence for equivalence of MyCog and MyCog 2.0.
resultsInternal consistency was high for executive function and episodic memory tests (ω
conclusionsFindings support MyCog 2.0 as the first reliable self-administered cognitive screener designed specifically for ease of use among older adults. Findings support the internal consistency and construct validity of MyCog 2.0 and provide a foundation for the forthcoming clinical validation studies.
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.