时间标签：数据日期 2026-11-05 · 生成时间 2026-11-05 05:30（Asia/Shanghai）｜ 检索窗口 PubMed edat 2026/11/02 – 2026/11/06 ｜ 情报发生日期 2026-11-05
研究问题
Despite these findings, it remains unclear whether visit modality introduces systematic bias in longitudinal estimates of cognitive performance, particularly between telephone and video‐enabled assessments.；We hypothesized that remote assessments would yield a performance broadly comparable to in‐person visits, with potential domain‐specific differences.；Third, we performed a sensitivity analysis to assess whether practice effects influenced the results.
方法
1BACKGROUNDThe COVID‐19 pandemic fundamentally altered the landscape of research in Alzheimer's disease and related dementias, necessitating rapid transition from in‐person to virtual cognitive assessments to ensure continuity of longitudinal cohort studies 1 , 2 .；While these adaptations enabled critical research continuity during public health restrictions, the comparability and psychometric properties of cognitive measures administered across different modalities have not been fully investigated in real‐world longitudinal cohorts.Recent studies have begun to examine the feasibility and reliability of virtual cognitive assessments with older adults 4 , especially during the COVID‐19 pandemic 5 .；In an analysis of 3838 NACC participants with paired remote and in‐person assessments, cross‐sectional reliability was moderate to good for most measures, although annual score changes differed between modalities for several cognitive tests 13 .
核心结论
Recent population‐based studies have demonstrated small but systematic mode effects across different modes of cognitive assessment 6 , 7 .；Despite these findings, it remains unclear whether visit modality introduces systematic bias in longitudinal estimates of cognitive performance, particularly between telephone and video‐enabled assessments.；Previous studies demonstrated the feasibility and reliability of telephone‐ and video‐based cognitive assessments during the COVID‐19 pandemic.
局限
Despite these findings, it remains unclear whether visit modality introduces systematic bias in longitudinal estimates of cognitive performance, particularly between telephone and video‐enabled assessments.；However, evidence regarding systematic modality‐related differences in longitudinal cognitive performance across large real‐world cohorts remains limited.；Future directions: Future studies should evaluate modality effects across dementia etiologies, additional neuropsychological measures, and more diverse populations and develop modality‐sensitive norms and standardized remote assessment protocols.
对本项目的价值
中等价值：属「脑老化与神经退行」方向；脑老化 / 神经退行 / 认知栏目可用作本项目文献库与综述素材。 ｜ 价值分 2.6/5（★★★☆☆）
全文来源
PubMed PMC JATS（正文 29,535 字符，题名指纹 0.77，已过 PubMed PMCID 官方关联 + 题名指纹 + 正文长度归属校验）
原文题录
- 中文题名：远程 versus 现场认知测试：就诊方式对老年人纵向认知结局的影响
- 英文标题：Remote versus in-person cognitive testing: the impact of visit modality on longitudinal cognitive outcomes in older adults.
- 期刊与标识：Alzheimer's & dementia (Amsterdam, Netherlands) · PMID 42979031 · DOI 10.1002/dad2.70530 · PMC PMC13728320