The usability and reliability of a smartphone application for monitoring future dementia risk in ageing UK adults.

IF 8.7 1区 医学 Q1 PSYCHIATRY
Graham Reid, Philip Vassilev, Jessica Irving, Triin Ojakäär, Liron Jacobson, Erin G Lawrence, Jenny Barnett, Malika Tapparel, Ivan Koychev
{"title":"The usability and reliability of a smartphone application for monitoring future dementia risk in ageing UK adults.","authors":"Graham Reid, Philip Vassilev, Jessica Irving, Triin Ojakäär, Liron Jacobson, Erin G Lawrence, Jenny Barnett, Malika Tapparel, Ivan Koychev","doi":"10.1192/bjp.2024.18","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The rising number of dementia diagnoses and imminent adoption of disease-modifying treatments necessitate innovative approaches to identify individuals at risk, monitor disease course and intervene non-pharmacologically earlier in the disease course. Digital assessments of dementia risk and cognitive function have the potential to outperform traditional in-person assessments in terms of their affordability, accuracy and longitudinal tracking abilities. However, their accessibility and reliability in older adults is unclear.</p><p><strong>Aims: </strong>To evaluate the usability and reliability of a smartphone assessment of lifestyle and cognitive factors relevant to dementia risk in a group of UK-based older adults.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>Cognitively healthy adults (<i>n</i> = 756) recruited through the Dementias Platform UK Great Minds volunteer register completed three assessments of cognitive function and dementia risk over a 3-month period and provided usability feedback on the Five Lives smartphone application (app). We evaluated cognitive test scores for age, gender and higher education effects, normality distributions, test-retest reliability and their relationship with participants' lifestyle dementia risk factors.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Participants found the app 'easy to use', 'quick to complete' and 'enjoyable'. The cognitive tests showed normal or near-to-normal distributions, variable test-retest reliabilities and age-related effects. Only tests of verbal ability showed gender and education effects. The cognitive tests did not correlate with lifestyle dementia risk scores.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The Five Lives assessment demonstrates high usability and reliability among older adults. These findings highlight the potential of digital assessments in dementia research and clinical practice, enabling improved accessibility and better monitoring of cognitive health on a larger scale than traditional in-person assessments.</p>","PeriodicalId":9259,"journal":{"name":"British Journal of Psychiatry","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":8.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11443166/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"British Journal of Psychiatry","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1192/bjp.2024.18","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: The rising number of dementia diagnoses and imminent adoption of disease-modifying treatments necessitate innovative approaches to identify individuals at risk, monitor disease course and intervene non-pharmacologically earlier in the disease course. Digital assessments of dementia risk and cognitive function have the potential to outperform traditional in-person assessments in terms of their affordability, accuracy and longitudinal tracking abilities. However, their accessibility and reliability in older adults is unclear.

Aims: To evaluate the usability and reliability of a smartphone assessment of lifestyle and cognitive factors relevant to dementia risk in a group of UK-based older adults.

Method: Cognitively healthy adults (n = 756) recruited through the Dementias Platform UK Great Minds volunteer register completed three assessments of cognitive function and dementia risk over a 3-month period and provided usability feedback on the Five Lives smartphone application (app). We evaluated cognitive test scores for age, gender and higher education effects, normality distributions, test-retest reliability and their relationship with participants' lifestyle dementia risk factors.

Results: Participants found the app 'easy to use', 'quick to complete' and 'enjoyable'. The cognitive tests showed normal or near-to-normal distributions, variable test-retest reliabilities and age-related effects. Only tests of verbal ability showed gender and education effects. The cognitive tests did not correlate with lifestyle dementia risk scores.

Conclusions: The Five Lives assessment demonstrates high usability and reliability among older adults. These findings highlight the potential of digital assessments in dementia research and clinical practice, enabling improved accessibility and better monitoring of cognitive health on a larger scale than traditional in-person assessments.

用于监测英国老年人未来痴呆症风险的智能手机应用程序的可用性和可靠性。
背景:痴呆症的诊断数量不断上升,而改变病情的治疗方法也即将采用,因此有必要采用创新方法来识别高危人群、监测病程并在病程早期进行非药物干预。痴呆症风险和认知功能的数字化评估在经济性、准确性和纵向追踪能力方面都有可能优于传统的面对面评估。目的:评估智能手机评估与英国老年人痴呆症风险相关的生活方式和认知因素的可用性和可靠性:通过英国痴呆症平台(Dementias Platform)的 "伟大心灵"(Great Minds)志愿者登记册招募的认知健康成年人(n = 756)在 3 个月内完成了三次认知功能和痴呆症风险评估,并提供了对 "五种生活"(Five Lives)智能手机应用程序(app)的可用性反馈。我们评估了认知测试分数的年龄、性别和高等教育效应、正态分布、重测可靠性及其与参与者生活方式中痴呆症风险因素的关系:结果:参与者认为该应用程序 "易于使用"、"快速完成 "且 "令人愉快"。认知测试显示出正常或接近正常的分布、不同的重测信度以及与年龄相关的影响。只有语言能力测试显示出性别和教育程度的影响。认知测试与生活方式痴呆症风险评分没有相关性:五种生活 "评估在老年人中具有很高的可用性和可靠性。这些研究结果凸显了数字评估在痴呆症研究和临床实践中的潜力,与传统的面对面评估相比,数字评估能在更大范围内提高认知健康的可及性和更好的监测。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
British Journal of Psychiatry
British Journal of Psychiatry 医学-精神病学
CiteScore
13.70
自引率
1.90%
发文量
184
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: The British Journal of Psychiatry (BJPsych) is a renowned international journal that undergoes rigorous peer review. It covers various branches of psychiatry, with a specific focus on the clinical aspects of each topic. Published monthly by the Royal College of Psychiatrists, this journal is dedicated to enhancing the prevention, investigation, diagnosis, treatment, and care of mental illness worldwide. It also strives to promote global mental health. In addition to featuring authoritative original research articles from across the globe, the journal includes editorials, review articles, commentaries on contentious issues, a comprehensive book review section, and a dynamic correspondence column. BJPsych is an essential source of information for psychiatrists, clinical psychologists, and other professionals interested in mental health.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信