ArticleJMIR mental health2025
Video Games and Gamification for Assessing Mild Cognitive Impairment: Scoping Review.
Article in JMIR mental health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Scenario-Based Serious Game for Screening Mild Cognitive Impairment in Older Adults: Cross-Sectional Preliminary Validation Study.JMIR serious games · 2026Article
- Video Games and Gamification for Assessing Mild Cognitive Impairment: Scoping Review.JMIR mental health · 2025Article
- Mobile cognitive assessment demonstrates diagnostic equivalence to MMSE and MoCA scales in Alzheimer's disease screening.Frontiers in neurologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundEarly assessment of mild cognitive impairment (MCI) in older adults is crucial, as it enables timely interventions and decision-making. In recent years, researchers have been exploring the potential of gamified interactive systems (GISs) to assess pathological cognitive decline. However, effective methods for integrating these systems and designing GISs that are both engaging and accurate in assessing cognitive decline are still under investigation.
objectiveWe aimed to comprehensively investigate GISs used to assess MCI. Specifically, we reviewed the existing systems to understand the different game types (including genres and interaction paradigms) used for assessment. In addition, we examined the cognitive functions targeted. Finally, we investigated the evidence for the performance of assessing MCI through GISs by looking at the quality of validation for these systems in assessing MCI and the diagnostic performance reported.
methodsWe conducted a scoping search in IEEE Xplore, ACM Digital Library, and Scopus databases to identify interactive gamified systems developed for assessing MCI. Game types were categorized according to genres and interaction paradigms. The cognitive functions targeted by the systems were compared with those assessed in the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA). Finally, we examined the quality of validation against the reference standard (ground truth), relevance of controls, and sample size. Where provided, the diagnostic performance on sensitivity, specificity, and area under the curve was reported.
resultsA total of 81 articles covering 49 GISs were included in this review. The primary game types used for MCI assessment were classified as casual games (30/49, 61%), simulation games (17/49, 35%), full-body movement games (4/49, 8%), and dedicated interactive games (3/49, 6%). Of the 49 systems, 6 (12%) assessed cognitive functions comprehensively, compared to those functions assessed via the MoCA. Of the 49 systems, 14 (29%) had validation studies, with sensitivities ranging from 70.7% to 100% and specificities ranging from 56.5% to 100%. The reported diagnostic performances of GISs were comparable to those of common screening instruments, such as Mini-Mental State Examination and MoCA, with some systems reporting near-perfect performance (area under the curve>0.98). However, these findings often stemmed from small samples and retrospective designs. Moreover, some of these systems' model training and validation exhibited substantial deficiencies.
conclusionsThis review provides a comprehensive summary of GISs for assessing MCI, exploring the cognitive functions assessed by these systems and evaluating their diagnostic performance. The results indicate that current GISs hold promise for the assessment of MCI, with several systems demonstrating diagnostic performance comparable to established screening tools. Nevertheless, despite some systems reporting impressive performance, there is a need for improvement in validation, particularly concerning sample size and methodological rigor. Future work should prioritize prospective validation and present greater methodological consistency.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.