ArticleHealthcare (Basel, Switzerland)2026
Video-Supported Remote Cognitive Assessment in General Practice-A Pilot Mixed-Method Study on Usability, Acceptability and Feasibility.
Article in Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland), 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
BACKGROUND/
objectivesAccess to specialists and diagnostic resources continues to limit differential diagnosis of cognitive impairment in primary care. This pilot study examined the feasibility, usability, and clinical integration of a digitally supported Remote Cognitive Assessment (RCA) model embedded in general practice settings.
methodsA mixed-method design was used, combining structured quantitative surveys from patients (
resultsPatients reported high satisfaction with audio (M = 8; SD = 2.28) and video quality (M = 9.17; SD = 1.17) and expressed a strong willingness to recommend RCA (M = 8.83; SD = 1.17) on a 10-point Likert scale. Despite moderate scores for perceived simplicity (M = 5; SD = 3.41) and effectiveness (M = 5.83; SD = 2.14), overall acceptance (M = 8.33; SD = 0.82) was favorable, especially given the older age of participants. Neuropsychologists rated technical functionality positively (audio quality M = 8.17; SD = 1.18; video quality M = 8; SD = 1.67) but raised concerns about clinical utility and diagnostic depth (effectiveness M = 2.83; SD = 2.71). GPs highlighted the benefits of local facilitation, early screening, and improved access to specialist input while also noting space limitations, communication gaps, and the need for sustainable infrastructure.
conclusionsThe RCA model was well accepted by patients and GPs, and technically feasible for neuropsychologists. However, neuropsychologists reported important reservations regarding usability and effectiveness. The results suggest an important mismatch between patient satisfaction and clinical confidence and RCA cannot yet be recommended for routine clinical implementations based on patient acceptability alone. This model holds promises for hybrid cognitive care, particularly in underserved or rural areas, but future development must prioritize diagnostic confidence and clinician workflow usability before scalable integration into rural cognitive care pathways can be established.
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.