Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@gmail.com&api_key=61f08fa0b96a73de8c900d749fcb997acc09&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 197
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 197
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 271
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3165
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 597
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 511
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 317
Function: require_once
98%
921
2 minutes
20
Background: Mobile health (mHealth) have significantly advanced evaluating neurocognitive functions; but, few reports have documented whether they validate neurocognitive impairments as well as paper-and-pencil neuropsychological tests.
Objective: To meta-analyze the correlation between mobile applications for neuropsychological tests and validated paper-and-pencil neuropsychological tests for evaluating neurocognitive impairments.
Method: We used PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, Web of Science, and IEEE Explorer through January 2020 to identify studies that compared mobile applications for neuropsychological tests vs. paper-and-pencil neurophysiological tests. We used random-effects models via the DerSimonian and Laird method to extract pooled Pearson's correlation coefficients and we stratified by study design.
Result: Nine out of 4639 screened articles (one RCT and eight prospective longitudinal case series) were included. For the observational studies, there was a statistically significant strong and direct correlation between mobile applications for neuropsychological test scores and validated paper-and-pencil neuropsychological assessment scores (r = 0.70; 95% CI 0.59, 0.79; I = 74.5%; p- heterogeneity <0.001). Stronger results were seen for the RCT (r = 0.92; 95% CI 0.77, 0.97).
Conclusion: This meta-analysis showed a statistically significant correlation between mobile applications and the validated paper-and-pencil neuropsychological assessments analyzed for the evaluation of neurocognitive impairments.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cmpb.2021.106484 | DOI Listing |