INS NYC 2024 Program

Poster	Poster Session 04 Program Schedule 02/15/2024 12:00 pm - 01:15 pm Room: Majestic Complex (Posters 61-120) Poster Session 04: Neuroimaging \| Neurostimulation/Neuromodulation \| Teleneuropsychology/Technology Final Abstract #79 “How did I do?” Expectations About Feedback and Their Associations with Remote Cognitive Assessment in an Older Adult Sample Caroline Nester, Alpert Medical School, Brown University, Providence, United States Alyssa De Vito, Alpert Medical School, Brown University, Providence, United States Zachary Kunicki, Alpert Medical School, Brown University, Providence, United States Sheina Emrani, Alpert Medical School, Brown University, Providence, United States Jennifer Strenger, Alpert Medical School, Brown University, Providence, United States Karra Harrington, Penn State University, University Park, United States Nelson Roque, Penn State University, University Park, United States Stephen Salloway, Alpert Medical School, Brown University, Providence, United States Martin Sliwinski, Penn State University, University Park, United States Louisa Thompson, Alpert Medical School, Brown University, Providence, United States Category: Teleneuropsychology/ Technology Keyword 1: aging (normal) Keyword 2: assessment Keyword 3: technology Objective: There is growing interest in using digital, remotely administered cognitive tests to assess and monitor cognitive status in older adult populations. Successful implementation of mobile app-based assessment requires adequate protocol adherence and engagement; however, little is understood about factors which might affect engagement in older individuals. Receiving feedback about performance is one method that may increase both motivation and engagement in digital tasks. We investigated whether a simple experimental manipulation - telling participants that they would or would not learn about their test results - was associated with adherence and performance on a remote digital cognitive testing protocol in an older adult sample. Participants and Methods: Participants (N =120) were cognitively unimpaired adults aged 60-80 years (67.5%female, 88%White, 75% ≥16 years of education). A modified Telephone Interview for Cognitive Status cutoff score of ≥34 established unimpaired cognition. Participants completed 8 consecutive days of assessments using Mobile Monitoring of Cognitive Change, a mobile app-based testing platform, with brief (3-4 minute) daily sessions within morning, afternoon, and evening time windows (24 total testing sessions). Tasks included measures of visual working memory, processing speed, and episodic memory. Participants were randomly assigned to one of two conditions: feedback (n=65) or no feedback (n=55), and were told that they would or would not receive performance feedback upon study completion, respectively. At the end of the study, all participants were given the option to receive feedback, regardless of condition. Linear regression analyses were used to evaluate significant differences between the feedback and control conditions on protocol adherence and performance on M2C2 tasks. Analyses adjusted for age, sex, and education. Results: Adherence was high overall (90.2% of participants completed at least 80% of the 24 sessions). Adherence did not differ by feedback condition (ß=0.01, SE=0.02, p=.79). There was a difference in adherence by feedback groups at the p<.10 level on day one (ß =-0.05, SE=0.03, p=.07), but not on day eight (ß=-0.06, SE=0.05, p=.22). There was an effect of feedback on processing speed on day one (ß=223, SE=83.5, p=.01) and day eight (ß=236, SE=60.5, p<.001). There was no effect of feedback on episodic memory or working memory performance. Conclusions: Findings suggest that simply knowing that feedback on cognitive test results will be received after testing could increase engagement and performance on digital cognitive tasks in older adults. This may be particularly true for capacities that are ostensibly more under individual control (e.g., processing speed, how quickly one performs on a task) than abilities that may be more reflective of objective cognition (e.g., episodic memory). Although there was some suggestion that feedback anticipation may boost protocol adherence, the ability to detect significant differences was likely limited by ceiling effects resulting from high study adherence in the overall sample. Future research and replication of these findings in more demographically diverse samples would enhance the generalizability of these results.

Poster

02/15/2024
12:00 pm - 01:15 pm
Room: Majestic Complex (Posters 61-120)

Poster Session 04: Neuroimaging | Neurostimulation/Neuromodulation | Teleneuropsychology/Technology

Final Abstract #79

“How did I do?” Expectations About Feedback and Their Associations with Remote Cognitive Assessment in an Older Adult Sample

Caroline Nester, Alpert Medical School, Brown University, Providence, United States
Alyssa De Vito, Alpert Medical School, Brown University, Providence, United States
Zachary Kunicki, Alpert Medical School, Brown University, Providence, United States
Sheina Emrani, Alpert Medical School, Brown University, Providence, United States
Jennifer Strenger, Alpert Medical School, Brown University, Providence, United States
Karra Harrington, Penn State University, University Park, United States
Nelson Roque, Penn State University, University Park, United States
Stephen Salloway, Alpert Medical School, Brown University, Providence, United States
Martin Sliwinski, Penn State University, University Park, United States
Louisa Thompson, Alpert Medical School, Brown University, Providence, United States

Category: Teleneuropsychology/ Technology

Keyword 1: aging (normal)
Keyword 2: assessment
Keyword 3: technology

Objective:

There is growing interest in using digital, remotely administered cognitive tests to assess and monitor cognitive status in older adult populations. Successful implementation of mobile app-based assessment requires adequate protocol adherence and engagement; however, little is understood about factors which might affect engagement in older individuals. Receiving feedback about performance is one method that may increase both motivation and engagement in digital tasks. We investigated whether a simple experimental manipulation - telling participants that they would or would not learn about their test results - was associated with adherence and performance on a remote digital cognitive testing protocol in an older adult sample.

Participants and Methods:

Participants (N =120) were cognitively unimpaired adults aged 60-80 years (67.5%female, 88%White, 75% ≥16 years of education). A modified Telephone Interview for Cognitive Status cutoff score of ≥34 established unimpaired cognition. Participants completed 8 consecutive days of assessments using Mobile Monitoring of Cognitive Change, a mobile app-based testing platform, with brief (3-4 minute) daily sessions within morning, afternoon, and evening time windows (24 total testing sessions). Tasks included measures of visual working memory, processing speed, and episodic memory. Participants were randomly assigned to one of two conditions: feedback (n=65) or no feedback (n=55), and were told that they would or would not receive performance feedback upon study completion, respectively. At the end of the study, all participants were given the option to receive feedback, regardless of condition. Linear regression analyses were used to evaluate significant differences between the feedback and control conditions on protocol adherence and performance on M2C2 tasks. Analyses adjusted for age, sex, and education.

Results:

Adherence was high overall (90.2% of participants completed at least 80% of the 24 sessions). Adherence did not differ by feedback condition (ß=0.01, SE=0.02, p=.79). There was a difference in adherence by feedback groups at the p<.10 level on day one (ß =-0.05, SE=0.03, p=.07), but not on day eight (ß=-0.06, SE=0.05, p=.22). There was an effect of feedback on processing speed on day one (ß=223, SE=83.5, p=.01) and day eight (ß=236, SE=60.5, p<.001). There was no effect of feedback on episodic memory or working memory performance.

Conclusions:

Findings suggest that simply knowing that feedback on cognitive test results will be received after testing could increase engagement and performance on digital cognitive tasks in older adults. This may be particularly true for capacities that are ostensibly more under individual control (e.g., processing speed, how quickly one performs on a task) than abilities that may be more reflective of objective cognition (e.g., episodic memory). Although there was some suggestion that feedback anticipation may boost protocol adherence, the ability to detect significant differences was likely limited by ceiling effects resulting from high study adherence in the overall sample. Future research and replication of these findings in more demographically diverse samples would enhance the generalizability of these results.