A validation study for wide-range remote assessment of cognitive functions in the healthy older Japanese population: a pilot randomised crossover trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The assessment of a wide range of cognitive functions using video teleconference (VTC) systems cannot be applied in practice yet. We aimed to determine the feasibility and reliability of previously unvalidated remote cognitive function tests in Japan using common information and communication technology (ICT) devices, software, and VTC systems compared with face-to-face (FTF) assessment. METHODS: The sample consisted of 26 participants from senior citizens clubs and an employment service centre in Sapporo Japan, including 11 females and 15 males (age averaged 78.6 ± 6.8 years). Tests included the RCPM, Story recall, 10/36 spatial recall, selective reminding test, SDMT, PASAT, FAB, TMT-A, TMT-B, visual cancellation task, digit span, tapping span. The experimental design was a counterbalanced crossover randomised controlled trial. Intraclass correlations (ICCs), paired-samples t-tests, Cohen's Kappa (κ) coefficients, and Wilcoxon signed-rank test were calculated to compare the scores between VTC and FTF assessments. RESULTS: All ICCs were significant and ranged from 0.47 (RCPM time) to 0.92 (RCPM score and PASAT), with a mean ICC of 0.75. Digit span using Cohen's Kappa (κ) coefficient was significant, but the tapping span was not. Paired samples t-test showed statistically significant differences in SDMT, RCPM time, and cancellation time. CONCLUSIONS: The results suggest that remote video conference-based neuropsychological tests even using familiar devices and software may be able to assess a wide range of cognitive functions in the Japanese older population. As for the processing speed tasks, we need to create our own standards for the remote condition. For the tapping span, we should consider increasing the number of trials.
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 | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".