Searching for just a few words should be enough to get started. If you need to make more complex queries, use the tips below to guide you.
Article type: Research Article
Authors: Hunter, Matthew B.a; * | Jenkins, Nataliea | Dolan, Clarea | Pullen, Hannaha | Ritchie, Craiga | Muniz-Terrera, Gracielaa
Affiliations: [a] Edinburgh Dementia Prevention, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK
Correspondence: [*] Correspondence to: Matthew B. Hunter, Edinburgh Dementia Prevention, University of Edinburgh, BioCube 1, Little France Road, Edinburgh, EH16 4UX, UK. Tel.: 0131 651 7828; E-mail: Matthew.Hunter@ed.ac.uk.
Abstract: Background:Telephone and videoconference administration of cognitive tests introduce additional sources of variance compared to in-person testing. Reviews of test-retest reliability have included mixed neurocognitive and psychiatric populations with limited consideration of methodological and statistical contributions. Objective:We reviewed reliability estimates from comparison studies of older adults with and without dementia, considering test-retest analyses and study methods. Methods:Medline, Embase, PsycINFO, and Web of Science were systematically searched from 1 January 2000 to 9 June 2020 for original articles comparing telephone or videoconference administered cognitive instruments to in-person administration in older adults with and without dementia or mild cognitive impairment. Results:Of 4,125 articles, 23 were included: 11 telephone (N = 2 dementia cohorts) and 12 videoconference (N = 4 dementia cohorts). Telephone administered subtest scores trended in the same direction as in-person with comparable means. Person-level data were scarce. Data on dementia was only available for MMSE, with resulting subtle modality bias. MMSE, SMMSE, Letter Fluency, and HVLT-R in healthy to mild-moderate Alzheimer’s disease were particularly reliable for videoconference administration. Other tests show promise but require more observations and comprehensive analyses. Most studies used high-speed stable videoconferencing hardware resulting in a lack of ecological validity for home administration. Conclusion:Remote administration is often consistent with in-person administration but variable and limited at the person/test level. Improved statistical design and inclusion of dementia related cohorts in telephone studies is recommended. Reliability evidence is stronger for videoconferencing but with limited applicability to home administration and severe dementia. Improved reporting of administrative procedures is recommended.
Keywords: Alzheimer’s disease, mild cognitive impairment, neuropsychological assessment, telehealth, telemedicine, teleneuropsychology
DOI: 10.3233/JAD-210088
Journal: Journal of Alzheimer's Disease, vol. 81, no. 4, pp. 1625-1647, 2021
IOS Press, Inc.
6751 Tepper Drive
Clifton, VA 20124
USA
Tel: +1 703 830 6300
Fax: +1 703 830 2300
sales@iospress.com
For editorial issues, like the status of your submitted paper or proposals, write to editorial@iospress.nl
IOS Press
Nieuwe Hemweg 6B
1013 BG Amsterdam
The Netherlands
Tel: +31 20 688 3355
Fax: +31 20 687 0091
info@iospress.nl
For editorial issues, permissions, book requests, submissions and proceedings, contact the Amsterdam office info@iospress.nl
Inspirees International (China Office)
Ciyunsi Beili 207(CapitaLand), Bld 1, 7-901
100025, Beijing
China
Free service line: 400 661 8717
Fax: +86 10 8446 7947
china@iospress.cn
For editorial issues, like the status of your submitted paper or proposals, write to editorial@iospress.nl
如果您在出版方面需要帮助或有任何建, 件至: editorial@iospress.nl