The feasibility and reliability of neuropsychological assessment at a distance have been demonstrated, but the validity of this testing medium has not been adequately demonstrated. The purpose of this study was to determine the ability of video teleconferencing administration of neuropsychological measures (teleneuropsychology) in discriminating cognitively impaired from non-impaired groups of older adults. It was predicted that measures administered via video teleconference would distinguish groups and that the magnitude of differences between impaired and non-impaired groups would be similar to group differences achieved in traditional administration.
The sample consisted of 197 older subjects, separated into two groups, with and without cognitive impairment. The cognitive impairment group included 78 individuals with clinical diagnoses of mild cognitive impairment or Alzheimer's disease. All participants completed counterbalanced neuropsychological testing using alternate test forms in both a teleneuropsychology and a traditional face-to-face (FTF) administration condition. Tests were selected based upon their common use in dementia evaluations, brevity, and assessment of multiple cognitive domains. Results from FTF and teleneuropsychology test conditions were compared using individual repeated measures ANCOVA, controlling for age, education, gender, and depression scores.
All ANCOVA models revealed significant main effects of group and a non-significant interaction between group and administration condition. All ANCOVA models revealed non-significant main effects for administration condition, except category fluency.
Results derived from teleneuropsychologically administered tests can distinguish between cognitively impaired and non-impaired individuals similar to traditional FTF assessment. This adds to the growing teleneuropsychology literature by supporting the validity of remote assessments in aging populations.
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 13. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 06 July 2025.
All research outputs
#3,413,267
of 32,240,582 outputs
Outputs from Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology
#147
of 1,326 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#60,262
of 482,845 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology
#3
of 18 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 32,240,582 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,326 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.6. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 482,845 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 18 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.
