Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40678715›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in digital health2025

Reliability of remote self-administered digital cognitive assessments: preliminary validation study.

Duong Huynh, Siao Ye, Reza Hosseini Ghomi, Mary Patterson, Bin Huang

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in digital health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Cognitive Trajectories After Hospitalization for COVID-19: A 36-Month Longitudinal Study.The Journal of neuropsychiatry and clinical neurosciences · 2026
    Article
  4. Observational
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Duong HuynhDepartment of Clinical Development, BrainCheck Inc., Austin, TX, United States.
Siao YeDepartment of Clinical Development, BrainCheck Inc., Austin, TX, United States.
Reza Hosseini GhomiDepartment of Clinical Development, BrainCheck Inc., Austin, TX, United States.
Mary PattersonDepartment of Clinical Development, BrainCheck Inc., Austin, TX, United States.
Bin HuangDepartment of Clinical Development, BrainCheck Inc., Austin, TX, United States.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Early diagnosis of cognitive impairment and dementia relies on comprehensive, evidence-based cognitive assessments, which currently requires a clinic visit and access to skilled healthcare providers. This poses a challenge for people who live in areas with inadequate primary care services and those who have economic, insurance, or other transient hardships (transportation, time, etc.) that limit their access to healthcare services. Digital cognitive assessments (DCAs) with remote testing capabilities have emerged as an efficient and cost-effective solution. The aim of this study was to validate the reliability of BrainCheck, a platform for DCAs, when self-administered remotely. Methods: A total of 46 participants (60.9% female; age range 52-76) remotely completed a battery of six BrainCheck cognitive assessments twice on the same device (iPad = 8, iPhone = 5, laptop = 33): the participants self-administered in one session and were administered by a research coordinator (RC) in the other session. Thirty participants completed the self-administered session first, while 16 completed it second. The inter-session interval (ISI) varied across participants, from within the same day to 21 days apart. Testing outcomes, including the duration of time needed to complete the battery, the raw score from each assessment, and the raw overall score, were compared between the two sessions. Results: We found moderate or good agreement between self- and RC-administered performance, with intraclass correlation ranging from 0.59 to 0.83. Results from mixed-effects modeling further confirm the non-significant difference between self- vs. RC-administered testing performance, which is independent of other factors including testing order, ISI, device, and participants' demographic characteristics. Discussion: These results demonstrate the feasibility of remote self-administration using BrainCheck.

Indexed as

BrainCheckdementia diagnosisdigital cognitive assessmentreliabilityself-administered testing

Identifiers

PMID40678715
PMCPMC12267269

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.