Passively collected data from smartphones improves detection of frontotemporal dementia compared to the MoCA
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Frontotemporal dementia (FTD) is a common young-onset dementia. Challenges to in-person FTD evaluations (e.g., behavioral symptoms, disease rarity), highlight the need to develop remote, low-burden assessment techniques. A growing literature supports passive digital phenotyping for monitoring neurobehavioral change. Thus, we examined the utility of passively collected data from smartphones to detect prodromal or symptomatic FTD compared to that of the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA), a common cognitive screener. METHOD: 199 adults enrolled in the ALLFTD Mobile App study (mean age = 53.4 [SD = 15.2]; 58% women) completed up to 6 months of passive smartphone monitoring via the ALLFTD Mobile App. 55% were unimpaired [CDR®+NACC FTLD = 0], 22% had prodromal FTD [CDR®+NACC FTLD = 0.5], and 23% had symptomatic FTD [CDR®+NACC FTLD≥1] with a variety of syndromic presentations. Battery percentage was collected frequently (median interval = 45 min), and total daily battery usage was calculated as a proxy for smartphone use (higher battery usage = more smartphone use). Daily step counts were also passively collected. Logistic regression classified prodromal or symptomatic FTD vs. unimpaired as a function of: MoCA score [Model 1]; 7 passive features characterizing average, inter-day variability, and changes over time in smartphone use and movement [Model 2]; or passive smartphone features and MoCA [Model 3]. Analyses were repeated excluding participants with symptomatic FTD to detect prodromal FTD vs. unimpaired. RESULT: The area under the curves (AUCs) for detecting prodromal or symptomatic FTD (vs. unimpaired) from the MoCA alone [Model 1] and passive smartphone features alone [Model 2] were 0.77 (95%CI: 0.70-0.85) and 0.77 (95%CI: 0.70-0.84), respectively. Their combination [Model 3] resulted in a significantly improved AUC of 0.86 (95%CI: 0.80-0.92) compared to Model 1 (p = 0.001). Significant Model 3 predictors included average daily battery usage (p = 0.02), slopes of change in step count (p = 0.04), and MoCA score (p<0.01). When distinguishing prodromal FTD from unimpaired, passive smartphone features alone (AUC = 0.75) were significantly better than the MoCA alone (AUC = 0.66; p<0.01), and their combination had the largest AUC (0.80). CONCLUSION: Results support the utility of novel passively collected information from smartphones for detecting and monitoring FTD without contributing to assessment burden. With continued validation, passive digital monitoring methodologies have potential to increase access to dementia care.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".