ReviewChildren (Basel, Switzerland)2025
Can Functional Cognitive Assessments for Children/Adolescents Be Transformed into Digital Platforms? A Conceptual Review.
Review in Children (Basel, Switzerland), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
BACKGROUND/
objectivesFunctional cognition, integrating cognitive abilities during real-life task performance, is essential for understanding daily functioning in children and adolescents. Traditional paper-based cognitive assessments in controlled environments often lack ecological validity. Although performance-based assessments more accurately represent functioning in natural contexts, most have not been transformed into digital formats. With technology increasingly embedded in education and healthcare, examining the extent/nature of adaptations, benefits, and challenges of digitizing these tools is important. This conceptual review aimed to (1) examine the extent/nature of traditional performance-based cognitive assessments adapted into digital platforms, (2) compare ecological validity/scoring metrics of traditional and digital tools, and (3) identify opportunities and propose recommendations for future development.
methodsWe used an AI-based tool (Elicit Pro, Elicit Plus 2024) to conduct a literature search for publications from the past decade, focusing on transformations of traditional assessments into digital platforms for children and adolescents. This initial search yielded 240 items. After screening, 45 were retained for manual review. Studies were extracted based on their discussion of the assessments (traditional or digital) and assessment tools used. Ultimately, 13 papers that met the inclusion criteria were evaluated based on units of analysis.
resultsThe analysis yielded three units. The first unit focused on digital transformation trends: four assessments (31%) were converted to digital platforms, two (15%) were developed as native digital tools, and the majority (seven, 54%) remained traditional. In the second unit, assessments were evaluated according to ecological validity and digital availability, demonstrating that assessments with high ecological validity tended not to be digitally accessible. The third unit synthesized scoring metrics, identifying eight distinct cognitive domains.
conclusionsDigitizing functional cognitive assessments offers greater accessibility, precision, and scalability, but replicating real-world contexts remains challenging. Emerging technologies may enhance ecological validity and support development of effective, technology-enhanced assessment practices.
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.