Capturing Cognitive Aging in Vivo: Application of a Neuropsychological Framework for Emerging Digital Tools
Bibliographic record
Abstract
As the global burden of dementia continues to plague our healthcare systems, efficient, objective, and sensitive tools to detect neurodegenerative disease and capture meaningful changes in everyday cognition are increasingly needed. Emerging digital tools present a promising option to address many drawbacks of current approaches, with contexts of use that include early detection, risk stratification, prognosis, and outcome measurement. However, conceptual models to guide hypotheses and interpretation of results from digital tools are lacking and are needed to sort and organize the large amount of continuous data from a variety of sensors. In this viewpoint, we propose a neuropsychological framework for use alongside a key emerging approach-digital phenotyping. The Variability in Everyday Behavior (VIBE) model is rooted in established trends from the neuropsychology, neurology, rehabilitation psychology, cognitive neuroscience, and computer science literature and links patterns of intraindividual variability, cognitive abilities, and everyday functioning across clinical stages from healthy to dementia. Based on the VIBE model, we present testable hypotheses to guide the design and interpretation of digital phenotyping studies that capture everyday cognition in vivo. We conclude with methodological considerations and future directions regarding the application of the digital phenotyping approach to improve the efficiency, accessibility, accuracy, and ecological validity of cognitive assessment in older adults.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".