Associations between Participant Characteristics and Participant Feedback about an Unsupervised Online Cognitive Assessment in a Research Registry.
Brain health registry
Cogstate Brief Battery
education
feedback
race
Journal
The journal of prevention of Alzheimer's disease
ISSN: 2426-0266
Titre abrégé: J Prev Alzheimers Dis
Pays: Switzerland
ID NLM: 101638820
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2023
2023
Historique:
medline:
27
6
2023
pubmed:
26
6
2023
entrez:
25
6
2023
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
This study aims to understand whether and how participant characteristics (age, gender, education, ethnocultural identity) are related to their feedback about taking a remote, unsupervised, online cognitive assessment. The Brain Health Registry is a public online registry which includes cognitive assessments. Multivariable ordinal regressions assessed associations between participant characteristics and feedback responses of older (55+) participants (N=11,553) regarding their Cogstate Brief Battery assessment experience. Higher age, secondary education or less, Latino identity, and female gender were associated with a poorer assessment experience; higher age and a non-White identity were associated with experiencing the assessment instructions as less clear; and higher age, non-White identity, and secondary education or less were associated with rating additional human support with the assessment as more useful. Our findings highlight the importance of improving the design and instructions of unsupervised, remote, online cognitive assessments to better suit the needs of diverse communities.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
This study aims to understand whether and how participant characteristics (age, gender, education, ethnocultural identity) are related to their feedback about taking a remote, unsupervised, online cognitive assessment.
METHODS
The Brain Health Registry is a public online registry which includes cognitive assessments. Multivariable ordinal regressions assessed associations between participant characteristics and feedback responses of older (55+) participants (N=11,553) regarding their Cogstate Brief Battery assessment experience.
RESULTS
Higher age, secondary education or less, Latino identity, and female gender were associated with a poorer assessment experience; higher age and a non-White identity were associated with experiencing the assessment instructions as less clear; and higher age, non-White identity, and secondary education or less were associated with rating additional human support with the assessment as more useful.
DISCUSSION
Our findings highlight the importance of improving the design and instructions of unsupervised, remote, online cognitive assessments to better suit the needs of diverse communities.
Identifiants
pubmed: 37357303
doi: 10.14283/jpad.2023.40
pmc: PMC10126538
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, N.I.H., Extramural
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
607-614Subventions
Organisme : NIA NIH HHS
ID : F32 AG072730
Pays : United States
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
Joseph Eichenbaum, Anna Aaronson, Chengshi Jin, Aaron Ulbricht, Derek Flenniken, Diana Truran, Juliet Fockler, Monica Camacho, and R. Scott Mackin have nothing to disclose. Dr. Ashford reports grants from NIA during the conduct of the study (F32 AG072730-02). Dr. Neuhaus reports grants from NIH during the conduct of the study. Dr. Maruff reports that he is a full-time employee of Cogstate. Dr. Weiner reports grants from National Institutes of Health (NIH), grants from Department of Defense (DOD), grants from Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI), grants from California Department of Public Health (CDPH), grants from University of Michigan, grants from Siemens, grants from Biogen, grants from Hillblom Foundation, grants from Alzheimer’s Association, grants from The State of California, grants from Johnson and Johnson, grants from Kevin and Connie Shanahan, grants from GE, grants from VUmc, grants from Australian Catholic University (HBI-BHR), grants from The Stroke Foundation, grants from Veterans Administration, personal fees from Acumen Pharmaceutical, personal fees from Cerecin, personal fees from Dolby Family Ventures, personal fees from Eli Lilly, personal fees from Merck Sharp and Dohme Corp., personal fees from National Institute on Aging (NIA), personal fees from Nestle/Nestec, personal fees from PCORI/PPRN, personal fees from Roche, personal fees from University of Southern California (USC), personal fees from NervGen, personal fees from Baird Equity Capital, personal fees from BioClinica, personal fees from Cytox, personal fees from Duke University, personal fees from Eisai, personal fees from FUJIFILM-Toyama Chemical (Japan), personal fees from Garfield Weston, personal fees from Genentech, personal fees from Guidepoint Global, personal fees from Indiana University, personal fees from Japanese Organization for Medical Device Development, Inc. (JOMDD), personal fees from Medscape, personal fees from Peerview Internal Medicine, personal fees from Roche, personal fees from T3D Therapeutics, personal fees from WebMD, personal fees from Vida Ventures, personal fees from The Buck Institute for Research on Aging, personal fees from China Association for Alzheimer’s Disease (CAAD), personal fees from Japan Society for Dementia Research, personal fees from Korean Dementia Society, outside the submitted work; and I hold stocks or options with Alzheon Inc., Alzeca, and Anven. Dr. Nosheny reports grants from NIH, grants from Genentech, Inc., grants from California Department of Public Health outside the submitted work.
Références
BMC Psychol. 2013 Dec 23;1(1):30
pubmed: 25566378
Clin Neuropsychol. 2015;29(4):542-58
pubmed: 26165425
J Prev Alzheimers Dis. 2020;7(1):21-28
pubmed: 32010922
Arch Clin Neuropsychol. 2020 Nov 19;35(8):1288-1302
pubmed: 32647858
Alzheimers Dement (Amst). 2015 Jul 02;1(3):281-8
pubmed: 27239511
BMC Psychol. 2017 Aug 2;5(1):26
pubmed: 28768522
Alzheimers Dement. 2018 Aug;14(8):1063-1076
pubmed: 29754989
J Alzheimers Dis. 2018;63(3):1055-1063
pubmed: 29710723
J Alzheimers Dis. 2021;83(2):915-925
pubmed: 34366337
Alzheimers Dement (N Y). 2020 Jun 26;6(1):e12043
pubmed: 32607409
Alzheimers Dement. 2018 Nov;14(11):1397-1405
pubmed: 30297140
J Appl Gerontol. 2020 Jan;39(1):105-110
pubmed: 29661052
J Prev Alzheimers Dis. 2022;9(2):262-268
pubmed: 35542999
Alzheimers Dement (Amst). 2021 Jul 20;13(1):e12217
pubmed: 34295959
PLoS One. 2013 Sep 02;8(9):e74258
pubmed: 24023931
J Prev Alzheimers Dis. 2016;3(3):123-126
pubmed: 29205249
Age Ageing. 2004 Sep;33(5):447-52
pubmed: 15217776
NPJ Digit Med. 2020 Feb 17;3:21
pubmed: 32128451
Alzheimers Dement (Amst). 2021 Sep 30;13(1):e12243
pubmed: 34621977
Aust Occup Ther J. 2016 Dec;63(6):373-380
pubmed: 27059159
Alzheimers Dement (N Y). 2020 May 26;6(1):e12028
pubmed: 32478165
Front Psychiatry. 2020 Sep 18;11:579934
pubmed: 33061927
Clin Neuropsychol. 2010 Apr;24(3):429-53
pubmed: 20373222
Alzheimers Dement. 2023 May;19(5):1714-1728
pubmed: 36193827
Clin Neuropsychol. 2017 Jan;31(1):59-84
pubmed: 27266677