ArticleApplied clinical informatics2025
Analyzing Mobility Indicators Using Machine Learning to Detect Mild Cognitive Impairment: A Systematic Scoping Review.
Article in Applied clinical informatics, 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.
- Article
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
Abstract
The global aging population is rapidly increasing, and the prevalence of age-related cognitive conditions, such as mild cognitive impairment (MCI), is becoming more common. This condition, which represents intermediate stages between normal aging and dementia, underscores the importance of early detection and timely intervention to address the growing demand for health services. Traditional cognitive assessments have limitations, such as the consistency of results, prompting the need for innovative technology-based solutions.This study aimed to examine how technology-based mobility data collection methods and machine learning algorithms are used to detect MCI in adults.A systematic scoping review was conducted to identify papers that analyzed mobility-related data using machine learning algorithms, focusing on adults aged 18 or older with MCI. Seven databases were searched: MEDLINE, EMBASE, IEEE Xplore, PsycINFO, Scopus, Web of Science, and ACM Digital Library, yielding 2,901 papers.Twenty-four papers met the inclusion criteria, highlighting 116 mobility indicators used to classify or indicate MCI. Wearable devices were the most common data collection method, with mobile applications being the least utilized. The most frequently reported mobility indicator for walking was walking speed. For driving, indicators included the number of hard braking events, the number of night trips, and speed. Logistic regression, random forest, and neural networks were the most used machine learning algorithms. Overall, the mean accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity of all the algorithms were 86.1% (standard deviation [SD] = 6.7%), 84% (SD = 6.5%), and 72.8% (SD = 12%), respectively. The mean area under the curve and the harmonic mean of precision and recall scores (F1) were 0.77 (SD = 0.08) and 0.83 (SD = 0.16), respectively.This review highlights the use of technology-based methods, particularly wearable devices, in assessing mobility and applying machine learning algorithms to detect MCI. However, a notable gap in research on mobile app-based mobility monitoring suggests a promising direction for future 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.