ArticleAlzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association2026
Technology-natives and technology-adopters: Age differences in remote cognitive assessment in Alzheimer disease.
Article in Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association, 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
33 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionCognitive changes in the asymptomatic stages of Alzheimer disease (AD) are subtle and difficult to detect using conventional cognitive tests. High-frequency smartphone-based testing may improve sensitivity to these changes, but generational differences in technology use could influence performance. We examined generational differences in cognition using remote, high-frequency smartphone assessments.
methodsOlder adults (N = 444) from the Knight Alzheimer Disease Research Center and young and middle-aged adults (N = 113) from the Dominantly Inherited Alzheimer Network (DIAN) completed an in-clinic cognitive battery and brief smartphone tests up to four times daily for 7 days. We compared adherence, reliability, practice effects, and correlations with in-clinic measures.
resultsOlder adults showed higher adherence than younger participants (78% vs 59%). Younger adults achieved higher reliability with fewer sessions and exhibited much smaller practice effects. Smartphone to in-clinic test correlations were strong in both young-to-middle-aged and older adults. DISCUSSION: Generational differences have important implications for the design and implementation of smartphone-based cognitive 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.