English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Background  The original paper Self-Administered Gerocognitive Examination (SAGE) is a valid and reliable cognitive assessment tool used to identify individuals with mild cognitive impairment (MCI) or early dementia. We evaluated identical test questions in a digital format (eSAGE) made for tablet use with the goals of calibrating it against SAGE and establishing its association with other neuropsychological tests and clinical assessments of cognitive impairment.    Methods  Subjects aged 50 and over who had taken SAGE were recruited from community and clinic settings. Subjects were randomly selected to participate in a clinical evaluation including neuropsychological evaluations. SAGE and eSAGE were administered using a crossover design. Subjects were identified as dementia, MCI, or normal based on standard clinical criteria. Associations were investigated using Spearman correlations, linear regression, and sensitivity and specificity measures.    Results  Of the 426 subjects screened, 66 completed the evaluation. eSAGE score correlation to a battery of neuropsychological tests was 0.73 ( p  < 0.0001) with no significant difference between the paper and digital format. Spearman correlation of SAGE versus eSAGE was 0.88 ( p  < 0.0001), and they are related by the formula: eSAGE score = –1.05 + 0.99 × SAGE score. Since the slope is very close to 1 ( p  = 0.86) there is strong evidence that the scaling is identical between eSAGE and SAGE, with no scale bias. Overall, eSAGE scores are lower by an average of 1.21 and the decrease is statistically significant ( p  < 0.0001). For those subjects familiar with smartphones or tablets (one measure of digital proficiency), eSAGE scores are lower by an average of 0.83 points ( p  = 0.029). With a score 16 and higher being classified as normal, eSAGE had 90% specificity and 71% sensitivity in detecting those with cognitive impairment from normal subjects.    Conclusions  Tablet-based eSAGE shows a strong association with the validated paper SAGE and a neuropsychological battery. It shows no scale bias compared to SAGE. Both have the advantage of self-administration, brevity, four interchangeable forms, and high sensitivity and specificity in detecting cognitive impairment from normal subjects. Their potential widespread availability will be a major factor in overcoming the many obstacles in identifying early cognitive changes.    Trial registration  ClinicalTrials.gov,  NCT02544074 . Registered on 18 March 2015.

alzheimer's research and therapy

Digitally translated Self-Administered Gerocognitive Examination (eSAGE): relationship with its validated paper version, neuropsychological evaluations, and clinical assessments