Multiple sclerosis and related disorders · 2025
Mobile-based cognitive screening tools in multiple sclerosis: Scoping literature and app store review.
СтатьяScoping ReviewНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Gromisch Elizabeth S, Imitola Jaime, Agresta Thomas, Turner Aaron P, Foley Frederick W, Gokhale Swapna S, Raskin Sarah A, Zemon Vance, Neto Lindsay O, Bailey Mary, DeLuca John
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Routine cognitive screenings have been recommended by several multiple sclerosis (MS) groups. One option are mobile-based programs, which can be administered using a smartphone or tablet. This scoping review aimed to identify the available mobile-based cognitive screening tools for persons with MS and understand potential gaps that should be considered when developing future cognitive screening tools.
METHODS: Systematic searches of the literature (PubMed, MEDLINE, CINHAL, and PsycINFO) and commercial application stores (Apple App Store and Google Play Store) were conducted in English through March 2024. A cognitive screening tool was defined as a program that assessed one or more cognitive domains objectively, with the assessment time taking 20 minutes or less. Only programs that could be administered using a mobile device and have been evaluated in at least one peer-review study with adults with MS (≥ 18 years old) were included. Information about the tool's availability, specificity for MS, number of tests and assessed domains, administration and scoring, stimuli and psychometric data, and inclusion of patient-reported outcomes (PROs) were extracted.
RESULTS: Thirty-two cognitive screening tools met the eligibility criteria. Five of the 16 commercially available programs were designed specifically for persons with MS, compared to 12 of the 16 investigational programs. Most programs were available in multiple languages, did not require a technician, and offered automated scoring. Limited screening options beyond information processing speed and availability of psychometric data, involvement of patient stakeholders, and integration with the electronic health record (EHR) were identified as weaknesses that could be addressed in the next generation of programs.
CONCLUSIONS: While more mobile-based options are becoming available, including tools that also offer depression screening and other PROs, there are still limitations that can affect their utility as routine cognitive screeners in a clinic setting. Considerations for addressing these weaknesses, including increasing the involvement of persons with MS in the development process, are discussed.
METHODS: Systematic searches of the literature (PubMed, MEDLINE, CINHAL, and PsycINFO) and commercial application stores (Apple App Store and Google Play Store) were conducted in English through March 2024. A cognitive screening tool was defined as a program that assessed one or more cognitive domains objectively, with the assessment time taking 20 minutes or less. Only programs that could be administered using a mobile device and have been evaluated in at least one peer-review study with adults with MS (≥ 18 years old) were included. Information about the tool's availability, specificity for MS, number of tests and assessed domains, administration and scoring, stimuli and psychometric data, and inclusion of patient-reported outcomes (PROs) were extracted.
RESULTS: Thirty-two cognitive screening tools met the eligibility criteria. Five of the 16 commercially available programs were designed specifically for persons with MS, compared to 12 of the 16 investigational programs. Most programs were available in multiple languages, did not require a technician, and offered automated scoring. Limited screening options beyond information processing speed and availability of psychometric data, involvement of patient stakeholders, and integration with the electronic health record (EHR) were identified as weaknesses that could be addressed in the next generation of programs.
CONCLUSIONS: While more mobile-based options are becoming available, including tools that also offer depression screening and other PROs, there are still limitations that can affect their utility as routine cognitive screeners in a clinic setting. Considerations for addressing these weaknesses, including increasing the involvement of persons with MS in the development process, are discussed.