ArticleBJGP open2026
Using artificial intelligence (CognoSpeak™) in memory assessments: a GP interview study.
Article in BJGP open, 2026. 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.
- Assessing the Utility of Automated and Pen-And-Paper Cognitive Assessment Tools for Underrepresented Groups in the UK.International journal of geriatric psychiatry · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe memory assessment pathway (MAP) for people with subjective memory deficits (dementia, mild cognitive impairment, and other diagnoses) is under huge strain and new diagnostic technologies have been identified as a high priority for research.
aimTo investigate the views of GPs on the MAP, and on how an artificial intelligence tool (CognoSpeak™) could be implemented. DESIGN &
settingQualitative interview study in a large region of the NHS (South Yorkshire) in England.
methodEighteen GPs were recruited using convenience sampling to undertake semi-structured interviews, which were analysed using reflexive thematic analysis (demographic data were monitored to ensure diversity).
resultsGPs think that the MAP has system-wide problems, and that GPs are overworked yet underutilised. They highlighted assessment and referral dilemmas, and the perspectives of patients and families. When asked about implementation of CognoSpeak™, they gave their thoughts on the optimal sites of implementation. The GPs also highlighted barriers and difficulties, as well as the opportunities and benefits, and they made proposals for the future development of CognoSpeak™.
conclusionGPs thought effective implementation of CognoSpeak™ could save time, expedite diagnosis, free-up much needed capacity, and improve the longitudinal assessment of people with mild cognitive impairment. A major concern among GPs was the potential for unintended consequences such as creating additional unfunded work. They also felt it could exacerbate difficulties at the intersections between subjective memory deficits and other factors such as low mood, excess alcohol consumption, learning difficulties, or language and culture. They were concerned about poor access to technology among older and more economically deprived people.
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.