ArticleAnnals of geriatric medicine and research2026
Validity and Reliability of Smartphone-Based Cognitive Assessment in Older Adults.
Article in Annals of geriatric medicine and research, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThis study examined the validity and reliability of two smartphone-based tasks, the Symbol Search Task (SST-SP) and the Dot Memory Task (DMT-SP), in cognitively healthy older adults.
methodsSixty participants (32 older and 28 younger adults) completed two sessions approximately one week apart. In the first session, participants performed standardized cognitive tests (Symbol Digit Substitution Test and Visual Digit Span Test) on a personal computer (PC), PCbased Symbol Search Task (SST-PC), and Dot Memory Task (DMT-PC), followed by the SST-SP and DMT-SP. The second session included only SST-SP and DMT-SP.
resultsIn older adults, the correlation between the SST-SP and SST-PC was very strong (r=0.83). In addition, the SST-SP showed a moderate correlation with the Symbol Digit Substitution Test (r=0.50). A very strong correlation was observed between DMT-SP and DMT-PC (r=0.86). The DMT-SP also showed a moderate correlation with the Visual Digit Span Test (r=-0.47). The SST-SP demonstrated good test-retest reliability and high split-half reliability, whereas the DMT-SP showed moderate test- retest reliability and acceptable-to-good split-half reliability. Older adults scored lower than younger adults on both the SST-SP and DMT-SP.
conclusionThe SST-SP and DMT-SP are valid and reliable tools for assessing processing speed and working memory, respectively, in cognitively healthy older adults. These tools may provide new strategies for assessing the cognitive performance and/or ability in older adults in both research and clinical settings.
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.