Cited by 16Dementia and Cognitive Impairment ResearchHistorical and Modern Theater StudiesCancer-related cognitive impairment studies

Performance of a computer‐based assessment of cognitive function measures in two cohorts of seniors

Open access
Espeland, Mark A., Katula, Jeffrey A., Rushing, Julia, Kramer, Arthur F., Jennings, Janine M., Sink, Kaycee M., Nadkarni, Neelesh K., Reid, Kieran F. +9 more·2013·International Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry

Abstract

Background: Computer‐administered assessment of cognitive function is being increasingly incorporated in clinical trials; however, its performance in these settings has not been systematically evaluated. Design: The Seniors Health and Activity Research Program pilot trial (N = 73) developed a computer‐based tool for assessing memory performance and executive functioning. The Lifestyle Interventions and Independence for Elders investigators incorporated this battery in a full‐scale multicenter clinical trial (N = 1635). We describe relationships that test scores have with those from interviewer‐administered cognitive function tests and risk factors for cognitive deficits and describe performance measures (completeness, intraclass correlations [ICC]). Results: Computer‐based assessments of cognitive function had consistent relationships across the pilot and full‐scale trial cohorts with interviewer‐administered assessments of cognitive function, age, and a measure of physical function. In the Lifestyle Interventions and Independence for Elders cohort, their external validity was further demonstrated by associations with other risk factors for cognitive dysfunction: education, hypertension, diabetes, and physical function. Acceptable levels of data completeness (>83%) were achieved on all computer‐based measures; however, rates of missing data were higher among older participants (odds ratio = 1.06 for each additional year; p < 0.001) and those who reported no current computer use (odds ratio = 2.71; p < 0.001). ICCs among clinics were at least as low (ICC < 0.013) as for interviewer measures (ICC < 0.023), reflecting good standardization. All cognitive measures loaded onto the first principal component (global cognitive function), which accounted for 40% of the overall variance. Conclusion: Our results support the use of computer‐based tools for assessing cognitive function in multicenter clinical trials of older individuals. Copyright © 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/gps.3949

Cites

35 of 35 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 36 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. National Research Council The Prevention and Treatment of Missing Data in Clinical Trials Panel on Handling Missing Data in Clinical Trials 2010 Committee on National Statistics, Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education The National Academies Press Washington, DC

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Espeland, M. A., Katula, J. A., Rushing, J., Kramer, A. F., Jennings, J. M., Sink, K. M., Nadkarni, N. K., Reid, K. F., Castro, C. M., Church, T., Kerwin, D. R., Williamson, J. D., Marottoli, R. A., Rushing, S., Marsiske, M., Rapp, S. R., & LIFE Study Group
Affiliations
  • Wake Forest University Health Sciences (US)
  • Wake Forest University (US)
  • University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign (US)
  • University of Pittsburgh (US)
  • Tufts University (US)
  • Stanford University (US)
  • Pennington Biomedical Research Center (US)
  • Northwestern University (US)
  • Yale University (US)
  • University of Florida Health (US)
Corresponding author
Espeland, Mark A.
Venue
International Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2013-04-16
Volume
28
Issue
12
Pages
1239-1250
ISSN
  • 0885-6230 (ISSN-L)
  • 1099-1166
OpenAlex
W1556406674
Cited by
16
References
36
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2023: 1 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 3
FWCI
1.89
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • International Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health (UL1TR000064)
  • National Institute on Aging (U01AG22376, U01AG022376, 3U01AG022376-05A2S, R01AG029285, P30AG024827, P30AG028740, P30AG021332)
  • National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (U01DK057136)
  • National Center for Research Resources (UL1RR029890, M01RR007122)
  • National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Dementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Historical and Modern Theater Studies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine › Cancer-related cognitive impairment studies
Keywords
cognitive function, older adults, memory performance, executive function, generalizability, data completeness, missing data, intraclass correlation coefficient, physical function, cognitive risk factors, global cognitive function
MeSH terms
Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Cognition Disorders, Diagnosis, Computer-Assisted, Female, Humans, Life Style, Male, Pilot Projects, Risk Factors, Cohort Studies, Cognitive Behavioral Therapy

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review