Abstract
Introduction A better understanding of the heterogeneity in the cognitive and mood symptoms of Parkinson’s disease will require research conducted in large samples of patients. Fully online and remote research assessments present interesting opportunities for scaling up research but the feasibility and reliability of remote and fully unsupervised performance-based cognitive testing in individuals with Parkinson’s disease is unknown. This study aims to establish the feasibility and reliability of this testing modality in Parkinson’s patients.
Methods Sixty-seven Parkinson’s patients and 36 older adults completed two sessions of an at-home, online battery of five cognitive tasks and three self-report questionnaires. Feasibility was established by examining completion rates and data quality. Test-retest reliability was evaluated using the Intraclass Correlation Coefficient (ICC (2,1)).
Results Overall completion rates and data quality were high with few participant exclusions across tasks. With regards to test-retest reliability, intraclass correlation coefficients were quite variable across measures extracted from a task as well as across tasks, but at least one standard measure from each task achieved moderate to good reliability levels. Self-report questionnaires achieved a higher test-retest reliability than cognitive tasks. Feasibility and reliability were similar between Parkinson’s patients and older adults.
Conclusion These results demonstrate that remote and unsupervised testing is a feasible and reliable method of measuring cognition and mood in Parkinson’s patients that achieves levels of test-retest reliability that are comparable to those reported for standard in-person testing.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
This study was funded by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR 180588) and from the Fonds de Recherche du Quebec - Sante.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
All procedures were evaluated and approved by the McGill University Health Centre (MUHC) Research Ethics Board.
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
All data produced in the present study are available upon reasonable request to the authors.
