Back

Preliminary Reliability and Validity of SynapTrack, a Smartphone-Based Digital Biomarker Platform for Remote Assessment of Cervical Spondylotic Myelopathy

Yakdan, S.; Singh, P.; Arkam, F.; Chen, E.; Lewis, A.; Steel, B.; Becker, I.; Guo, W.; Naveed, H.; Wang, C.; Yang, D.; Wang, Z.; Ray, W. Z.; Hassenstab, J.; Steinmetz, M. P.; Ghogawala, Z.; Kelleher, C.; Greenberg, J.

2026-06-01 surgery
10.64898/2026.05.29.26354454 medRxiv
Show abstract

Background and Objectives: Cervical spondylotic myelopathy (CSM) is a leading cause of neurological disability in older adults. However, validated, scalable tools to quantify disease severity and changes over time are lacking. Recent advances in smartphone technology have opened new avenues for longitudinal, objective, and remote monitoring of neurological conditions. We performed a preliminary evaluation of the reliability and validity of SynapTrack, a smartphone-based digital platform for objective remote CSM assessments. Methods: In this single-center prospective cohort study, 265 participants (151 with CSM, 114 healthy controls) completed in-person SynapTrack assessments related to tapping, pinching, and vibratory detection, along with reference laboratory measures of dexterity (Box and Block Test, 9-Hole Peg Test) and vibratory sensation (tuning fork). A subset completed repeated home-based testing to assess test-retest reliability. We evaluated convergent validity, construct validity against the modified Japanese Orthopedic Association (mJOA) score, known-groups validity, and test-retest reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient, ICC). Results: Smartphone-derived metrics demonstrated good-to-excellent test-retest reliability, with the strongest stability for vibratory detection threshold (ICC = 0.92), overall and non-dominant tapping speed (ICC = 0.90 each), and pinching successful targets (ICC = 0.90). Convergent validity was supported by moderate-to-strong correlations between digital metrics and reference laboratory dexterity tests ({rho} up to 0.60 for tapping speed; up to -0.65 for the vibratory threshold). Construct validity against the mJOA was strongest for the vibratory threshold ({rho} = -0.53 to -0.54) and Level 2 non-dominant pinching errors ({rho} = -0.45). Selected metrics distinguished CSM patients from controls with good discrimination, including non-dominant tapping speed (AUROC = 0.76, 95% CI 0.68-0.85), Level 2 dominant pinching successful targets (AUROC = 0.78, 95% CI 0.62-0.94), and the non-dominant vibratory threshold (AUROC = 0.77, 95% CI 0.64-0.90). Conclusions and Relevance: A smartphone-based battery of upper-extremity sensorimotor tasks demonstrated preliminary reliability and validity in CSM. Furthermore, to our knowledge, the novel vibratory detection task represents the first smartphone-based sensory assessment used for CSM. Collectively, these findings position SynapTrack as a scalable platform for objective, remote neurological monitoring of CSM.

Matching journals

The top 2 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
npj Digital Medicine
97 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
44.9%
2
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 11%
7.3%
50% of probability mass above
3
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 25%
6.8%
4
BMC Neurology
12 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
4.6%
5
Sensors
39 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
3.9%
6
Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation
28 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
3.9%
7
Brain Communications
147 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
3.9%
8
Frontiers in Neurology
91 papers in training set
Top 2%
2.2%
9
Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience
67 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.8%
10
eBioMedicine
130 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.8%
11
Gait & Posture
22 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.2%
12
Annals of Clinical and Translational Neurology
29 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
1.0%
13
IEEE Transactions on Neural Systems and Rehabilitation Engineering
40 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
1.0%
14
Journal of Neurotrauma
27 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
1.0%
15
Neurobiology of Disease
134 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.0%
16
BMJ Open
554 papers in training set
Top 11%
1.0%
17
Frontiers in Medicine
113 papers in training set
Top 5%
1.0%
18
The Cerebellum
15 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
0.9%
19
Neurorehabilitation and Neural Repair
17 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
0.9%
20
Trials
25 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.9%
21
Pilot and Feasibility Studies
12 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
0.9%
22
Biology Methods and Protocols
53 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.5%
23
Heliyon
146 papers in training set
Top 8%
0.5%
24
Journal of Clinical Medicine
91 papers in training set
Top 7%
0.5%
25
Human Brain Mapping
295 papers in training set
Top 5%
0.5%