Neuropsychological assessments for dementia research in the COVID-19 era: comparing remote and face-to-face testing
Requena-Komuro, M.-C.; Jiang, J.; Dobson, L.; Benhamou, E.; Russell, L.; Bond, R. L.; Brotherhood, E. V.; Greaves, C.; Barker, S.; Rohrer, J. D.; Crutch, S. J.; Warren, J. D.; Hardy, C. J.
Show abstract
ObjectivesWe explored whether adapting traditional neuropsychological tests for online administration against the backdrop of COVID-19 was feasible for people with diverse forms of dementia and healthy older controls. We compared face-to-face and remote settings to ascertain whether remote administration affected performance. DesignWe used a longitudinal design for healthy older controls who completed face-to-face neuropsychological assessments between three and four years before taking part remotely. For patients, we used a cross-sectional design, contrasting a prospective remote cohort with a retrospective face-to-face cohort matched in age, education, and disease duration. SettingRemote assessments were performed using video-conferencing and online testing platforms, with participants using a personal computer or tablet and situated in a quiet room in their own home. Face-to-face assessments were carried out in dedicated testing rooms in our research centre. ParticipantsThe remote cohort comprised ten healthy older controls (also seen face-to-face 3-4 years previously) and 25 patients (n=8 Alzheimers disease (AD); n=3 behavioural variant frontotemporal dementia (bvFTD); n=4 semantic dementia (SD); n=5 progressive nonfluent aphasia (PNFA); n=5 logopenic aphasia (LPA)). The face-to-face patient cohort comprised 64 patients (n=25 AD; n=12 bvFTD; n=9 SD; n=12 PNFA; n=6 LPA). Primary and secondary outcome measuresThe outcome measures comprised the strength of evidence under a Bayesian analytic framework for differences in performances between face-to-face and remote testing environments on a general neuropsychological (primary outcomes) and neurolingustic battery (secondary outcomes). ResultsThere was evidence to suggest comparable performance across testing environments for all participant groups, for a range of neuropsychological tasks across both batteries. ConclusionsOur findings suggest that remote delivery of neuropsychological tests for dementia research is feasible. Strengths and limitations of this studyO_ST_ABSMethodological strengths of this study includeC_ST_ABSO_LIDiverse patient cohorts representing rare dementias with specific communication difficulties C_LIO_LISampling of diverse and relevant neuropsychological domains C_LIO_LIUse of Bayesian statistics to quantify the strength of evidence for the putative null hypothesis (no effect between remote and face-to-face testing) C_LI Limitations includeO_LIRelatively small cohort sizes C_LIO_LILack of direct head-to-head comparisons of test environment in the same patients C_LI
Matching journals
The top 3 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Evaluation of a speech-based AI system for early detection of Alzheimer’s disease remotely via smartphones 96%
- Clinical Validation and Machine Learning Optimization of MyCog: A Self-Administered Cognitive Screener for Primary Care Settings 96%
- Relationship of plasma biomarkers to digital cognitive tests in alzheimer's disease 96%
Similar papers in this journal
- Impaired semantic control in the logopenic variant of primary progressive aphasia 96%
- The PREVENT Dementia programme: Baseline demographic, lifestyle, imaging and cognitive data from a midlife cohort study investigating risk factors for dementia 95%
- Self- versus caregiver-reported apathy across neurological disorders 95%
Similar papers in this journal
- Association between motor task acquisition and hippocampal atrophy across cognitively unimpaired, amnestic Mild Cognitive Impairment, and Alzheimer’s disease individuals 94%
- Race/Ethnic Disparities in Mild Cognitive Impairment and Dementia: The Northern Manhattan Study 93%
- Neurodevelopmental effects of genetic frontotemporal dementia mutations revealed by total intracranial volume differences 93%
Similar papers in this journal
- Examining a Preclinical Alzheimer’s Cognitive Composite for Telehealth Administration, the tPACC, for Reliability between In-Person and Remote Cognitive Testing with Neuroimaging Biomarkers 96%
- Sex differences in the association of mild behavioral impairment with cognitive aging 94%
- Screening for early-stage Alzheimer's disease using optimized feature sets and machine learning 93%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.