PT  - JOURNAL ARTICLE
AU  - Thienel, R.
AU  - Borne, L.
AU  - Faucher, C.
AU  - Robinson, G.A.
AU  - Fripp, J.
AU  - Giorgio, J.
AU  - Ceslis, A.
AU  - McAloney, K.
AU  - Adsett, J.
AU  - Galligan, D.
AU  - Martin, N.G.
AU  - Breakspear, M.
AU  - Lupton, M. K.
TI  - Can an online battery match in-person cognitive testing in predicting age-related cortical changes?
AID  - 10.1101/2023.04.24.23289014
DP  - 2023 Jan 01
TA  - medRxiv
PG  - 2023.04.24.23289014
4099  - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2023/04/26/2023.04.24.23289014.short
4100  - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2023/04/26/2023.04.24.23289014.full
AB  - Understanding how cognition and brain structure change across the lifespan is crucial for gaining insight into the healthy ageing process, as well as identifying early signs of neurodegenerative changes. In our recent prospective study of healthy ageing in midlife and older adults1, we compared the association of two cognitive batteries with age-related variability in brain morphology. Our findings revealed that online cognitive testing, which is more cost-effective, demonstrated comparable association to sulcal width as comprehensive in person assessment. In person cognitive testing shows a significantly stronger correlation with sulcal width when compared to online testing, although the difference is numerically minor. In addition, it was found that both cognitive assessment assays showed a more pronounced age-related decline in individuals with Aβ burden. These findings suggest that online assessment is able to detect accelerated cognitive ageing comparably to the in-person assay in our preclinical sample, even in the early stages of Aβ accumulation before significant structural brain changes occur. Taken together with their greater cost effectiveness, online cognitive testing could lead to more equitable early detection and intervention for neurodegenerative diseases.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Funding StatementThis study was funded by the National Health and Medical Research Council, Australia.Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:Data collection and analysis followed approval from the QIMR Berghofer Human Research Ethics Committee (P2193 and P2210), and the University of Newcastle Human Research ethics committee (H-2020-0439). Written informed consent was obtained from all participants following local institutional ethics approval.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.YesI 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).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.YesAll data produced in the present study are available upon reasonable request to the authors