Utility, reliability, sensitivity and validity of an online test system designed to monitor changes in cognitive function in clinical trials.

OBJECTIVE: The advent of long-term remotely conducted clinical trials requires assessments which can be administered online. This paper considers the utility, reliability, sensitivity and validity of an internet-based system for measuring changes in cognitive function which is being used in one such trial. METHODS: The Platform for Research Online to investigate Genetics and Cognition in Ageing is a 10-year longitudinal and entirely remote study launched in November 2015. The CogTrackTM System is being used to monitor changes in important aspects of cognitive function using tests of attention, information processing and episodic memory. On study entry, the participants performed CogTrackTM up to three times over seven days, and these data are evaluated in this paper. RESULTS: During the first six months of the study, 14 531 individuals aged 50 to 94 years enrolled and performed the CogTrackTM System, 8627 of whom completed three test sessions. On the first administration, 99.4% of the study tasks were successfully completed. Repeated testing showed training/familiarisation effects on four of the ten measures which had largely stabilised by the third test session. The factor structure of the various measures was found to be robust. Evaluation of the influence of age identified clinically relevant declines over the age range of the population on one or more measures from all tasks. CONCLUSIONS: The results of these analyses identify CogTrackTM to be a practical and valid method to reliably, sensitively, remotely and repeatedly collect cognitive data from large samples of individuals aged 50 and over. Copyright © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

The Effect of an Online Cognitive Training Package in Healthy Older Adults: An Online Randomized Controlled Trial.

INTRODUCTION: Cognitive training (CT) offers a potential approach for dementia prevention and maintenance of cognitive function in older adults. Online delivery provides a cost-effective means of implementing CT compared with in-person interventions, with the potential of providing an effective public health intervention for risk reduction. METHODS: A double-blind 6-month online randomized controlled trial in adults older than 50 randomized to General CT, Reasoning CT, or control. The primary outcome was instrumental activities of daily living (IADL) in adults older than 60. Secondary outcomes were reasoning, verbal short-term memory, spatial working memory, verbal learning (VL), and digit vigilance in adults older than 50. Secondary analyses were performed with a group defined as showing age-associated impairment in reasoning according to baseline scores in this domain. RESULTS: A total of 2912 adults older than 60 (6742 > 50) participated. General and reasoning packages conferred benefit to IADL (P = .008, P = .011), reasoning (P < 0.0001, P < .0001), and VL (P = .007, P = .008) at 6 months. Benefit in reasoning was evident from 6 weeks. Other benefits developed over 6 months. Analysis of participants with age-associated impairment also showed the same pattern of benefit. A clear dose-response effect was seen. CONCLUSIONS: Online CT confers significant benefit to cognition and function in older adults, with benefit favoring the Reasoning package. Scale of benefit is comparable with in-person training, indicating its potential as a public health intervention. Impact on the group with age-associated impairment indicates a particular sensitivity to this at-risk group, which merits further investigation.

Putting brain training to the test.

'Brain training', or the goal of improved cognitive function through the regular use of computerized tests, is a multimillion-pound industry, yet in our view scientific evidence to support its efficacy is lacking. Modest effects have been reported in some studies of older individuals and preschool children, and video-game players outperform non-players on some tests of visual attention. However, the widely held belief that commercially available computerized brain-training programs improve general cognitive function in the wider population in our opinion lacks empirical support. The central question is not whether performance on cognitive tests can be improved by training, but rather, whether those benefits transfer to other untrained tasks or lead to any general improvement in the level of cognitive functioning. Here we report the results of a six-week online study in which 11,430 participants trained several times each week on cognitive tasks designed to improve reasoning, memory, planning, visuospatial skills and attention. Although improvements were observed in every one of the cognitive tasks that were trained, no evidence was found for transfer effects to untrained tasks, even when those tasks were cognitively closely related.