INDUCT (Interdisciplinary Network for Dementia Using Current Technology), and DISTINCT (Dementia Inter-sectorial strategy for training and innovation network for current technology) are two Marie Sklodowska-Curie funded International Training Networks that aimed to develop a multi-disciplinary, inter-sectorial educational research framework for Europe to improve technology and care for people with dementia, and to provide the evidence to show how technology can improve the lives of people with dementia.

In INDUCT (2016-2020) 15 Early Stage Researchers worked on projects in the areas of Technology to support everyday life; technology to promote meaningful activities; and healthcare technology. In DISTINCT (2019-2023) 15 Early Stage Researchers worked on technology to promote Social health in three domains: fulfilling ones potential and obligations in society, managing one’s own life, and participation in social and other meaningful activities.

Both networks adopted three transversal objectives: 1) To determine practical, cognitive and social factors needed to make technology more useable for people with dementia; 2) To evaluate the effectiveness of specific contemporary technology; 3) To trace facilitators and barriers for implementation of technology in dementia care.

The main recommendations resulting from all research projects are integrated in a web-based digital Best Practice Guidance on Human Interaction with Technology in Dementia which was recently updated (Dec 2022 and June 2023) and will be presented at the congress. The recommendations are meant for different target groups, i.e. people in different stages of dementia, their (in)formal carers, policy makers, designers and researchers, who can easily find the recommendations relevant to them in the Best Practice Guidance by means of a digital selection tool.

The INDUCT/DISTINCT Best Practice Guidance informs on how to improve the development, usage, impact and implementation of technology for people with dementia in various technology areas. This Best Practice Guidance is the result of intensive collaborative partnership of INDUCT and DISTINCT with academic and non-academic partners as well as the involvement of representatives of the different target groups throughout the projects.

The Stricker Learning Span (SLS) is a computer-adaptive word list memory test specifically designed for remote assessment and self-administration on a web-based multi-device platform (Mayo Test Drive). Given recent evidence suggesting the prominence of learning impairment in preclinical Alzheimer’s disease (AD), the SLS places greater emphasis on learning than delayed memory compared to traditional word list memory tests (see Stricker et al., Neuropsychology in press for review and test details). The primary study aim was to establish criterion validity of the SLS by comparing the ability of the remotely-administered SLS and inperson administered Rey Auditory Verbal Learning Test (AVLT) to differentiate biomarkerdefined groups in cognitively unimpaired (CU) individuals on the Alzheimer’s continuum.

Mayo Clinic Study of Aging CU participants (N=319; mean age=71, SD=11; mean education=16, SD=2; 47% female) completed a brief remote cognitive assessment (∼0.5 months from in-person visit). Brain amyloid and brain tau PET scans were available within 3 years. Overlapping groups were formed for 1) those on the Alzheimer’s disease (AD) continuum (A+, n=110) or not (A-, n=209), and for 2) those with biological AD (A+T+, n=43) vs no evidence of AD pathology (A-T-, n=181). Primary neuropsychological outcome variables were sum of trials for both the SLS and AVLT. Secondary outcome variables examined comparability of learning (1-5 total) and delay performances. Linear model ANOVAs were used to investigate biomarker subgroup differences and Hedge’s G effect sizes were derived, with and without adjusting for demographic variables (age, education, sex).

Both SLS and AVLT performances were worse in the biomarker positive relative to biomarker negative groups (unadjusted p’s<.05). Because biomarker positive groups were significantly older than biomarker negative groups, group differences were attenuated after adjusting for demographic variables, but SLS remained significant for A+ vs A- and for A+T+ vs A-T- comparisons (adjusted p’s<.05) and AVLT approached significance (p’s .05-.10). The effect sizes for the SLS were slightly better (qualitatively, no statistical comparison) for separating biomarker-defined CU groups in comparison to AVLT. For A+ vs A- and A+T+ vs A-T- comparisons, unadjusted effect sizes for SLS were -0.53 and -0.81 and for AVLT were -0.47 and -0.61, respectively; adjusted effect sizes for SLS were -0.25 and -0.42 and for AVLT were -0.19 and -0.26, respectively. In secondary analyses, learning and delay variables were similar in terms of ability to separate biomarker groups. For example, unadjusted effect sizes for SLS learning (-.80) was similar to SLS delay (.76), and AVLT learning (-.58) was similar to AVLT 30-minute delay (-.55) for the A+T+ vs AT- comparison.

Remotely administered SLS performed similarly to the in-person-administered AVLT in its ability to separate biomarker-defined groups in CU individuals, providing evidence of criterion validity. The SLS showed significantly worse performance in A+ and A+T+ groups (relative to A- and A-T-groups) in this CU sample after demographic adjustment, suggesting potential sensitivity to detecting transitional cognitive decline in preclinical AD. Measures emphasizing learning should be given equal consideration as measures of delayed memory in AD-focused studies, particularly in the preclinical phase.

Mayo Test Drive (MTD): Test Development through Rapid Iteration, Validation and Expansion, is a web-based multi-device (smartphone, tablet, personal computer) platform optimized for remote self-administered cognitive assessment that includes a computer-adaptive word list memory test (Stricker Learning Span; SLS; Stricker et al., 2022; Stricker et al., in press) and a measure of processing speed (Symbols Test: Wilks et al., 2021). Study aims were to determine criterion validity of MTD by comparing the ability of the MTD raw composite and in-person administered cognitive measures to differentiate biomarkerdefined groups in cognitively unimpaired (CU) individuals on the Alzheimer’s continuum.

Mayo Clinic Study of Aging CU participants (N=319; mean age=71, SD=11, range=37-94; mean education=16, SD=2, range=6-20; 47% female) completed a brief remote cognitive assessment (∼0.5 months from in-person visit). Brain amyloid and brain tau PET scans were available within 3 years. Overlapping groups were formed for 1) those on the Alzheimer’s disease (AD) continuum (A+, n=110) or not (A-, n=209), and for 2) those with biological AD (A+T+, n=43) or with no evidence of AD pathology (A-T-, n=181). Primary outcome variables were MTD raw composite (SLS sum of trials + an accuracy-weighted Symbols response time measure), Global-z (average of 9 in-person neuropsychological measures) and an in-person screening measure (Kokmen Short Test of Mental Status, STMS; which is like the MMSE). Linear model ANOVAs were used to investigate biomarker subgroup differences and Hedge’s G effect sizes were derived, with and without adjusting for demographic variables (age, education, sex).

Remotely administered MTD raw composite showed comparable to slightly larger effect sizes compared to Global-z. Unadjusted effect sizes for MTD raw composite for differentiating A+ vs. A- and A+T+ vs. A-T- groups, respectively, were -0.57 and -0.84 and effect sizes for Global-z were -0.54 and -0.73 (all p’s<.05). Because biomarker positive groups were significantly older than biomarker negative groups, group differences were attenuated after adjusting for demographic variables, but MTD raw composite remained significant for A+T+ vs A-T- (adjusted effect size -0.35, p=.007); Global-z did not reach significance for A+T+ vs A-T- (adjusted effect size -0.19, p=.08). Neither composite reached significance for adjusted analyses for the A+ vs A- comparison (MTD raw composite adjusted effect size= -.22, p=.06; Global-z adjusted effect size= -.08, p=.47). Results were the same for an alternative MTD composite using traditional z-score averaging methods, but the raw score method is preferred for comparability to other screening measures. The STMS screening measure did not differentiate biomarker groups in any analyses (unadjusted and adjusted p’s>.05; d’s -0.23 to 0.05).

Remotely administered MTD raw composite shows at least similar ability to separate biomarker-defined groups in CU individuals as a Global-z for person-administered measures within a neuropsychological battery, providing evidence of criterion validity. Both the MTD raw composite and Global-z showed greater ability to separate biomarker positive from negative CU groups compared to a typical screening measure (STMS) that was unable to differentiate these groups. MTD may be useful as a screening measure to aid early detection of Alzheimer’s pathological changes.

Normative neuropsychological data are essential for interpretation of test performance in the context of demographic factors. The Mayo Normative Studies (MNS) aim to provide updated normative data for neuropsychological measures administered in the Mayo Clinic Study of Aging (MCSA), a population-based study of aging that randomly samples residents of Olmsted County, Minnesota, from age- and sex-stratified groups. We examined demographic effects on neuropsychological measures and validated the regression-based norms in comparison to existing normative data developed in a similar sample.

The MNS includes cognitively unimpaired adults ≥30 years of age (n = 4,428) participating in the MCSA. Multivariable linear regressions were used to determine demographic effects on test performance. Regression-based normative formulas were developed by first converting raw scores to normalized scaled scores and then regressing on age, age2, sex, and education. Total and sex-stratified base rates of low scores (T < 40) were examined in an older adult validation sample and compared with Mayo’s Older Americans Normative Studies (MOANS) norms.

Independent linear regressions revealed variable patterns of linear and/or quadratic effects of age (r2 = 6–27% variance explained), sex (0–13%), and education (2–10%) across measures. MNS norms improved base rates of low performance in the older adult validation sample overall and in sex-specific patterns relative to MOANS.

Our results demonstrate the need for updated norms that consider complex demographic associations on test performance and that specifically exclude participants with mild cognitive impairment from the normative sample.

The Stricker Learning Span (SLS) is a computer-adaptive digital word list memory test specifically designed for remote assessment and self-administration on a web-based multi-device platform (Mayo Test Drive). We aimed to establish criterion validity of the SLS by comparing its ability to differentiate biomarker-defined groups to the person-administered Rey’s Auditory Verbal Learning Test (AVLT).

Participants (N = 353; mean age = 71, SD = 11; 93% cognitively unimpaired [CU]) completed the AVLT during an in-person visit, the SLS remotely (within 3 months) and had brain amyloid and tau PET scans available (within 3 years). Overlapping groups were formed for 1) those on the Alzheimer’s disease (AD) continuum (amyloid PET positive, A+, n = 125) or not (A-, n = 228), and those with biological AD (amyloid and tau PET positive, A+T+, n = 55) vs no evidence of AD pathology (A−T−, n = 195). Analyses were repeated among CU participants only.

The SLS and AVLT showed similar ability to differentiate biomarker-defined groups when comparing AUROCs (p’s > .05). In logistic regression models, SLS contributed significantly to predicting biomarker group beyond age, education, and sex, including when limited to CU participants. Medium (A− vs A+) to large (A−T− vs A+T+) unadjusted effect sizes were observed for both SLS and AVLT. Learning and delay variables were similar in terms of ability to separate biomarker groups.

Remotely administered SLS performed similarly to in-person-administered AVLT in its ability to separate biomarker-defined groups, providing evidence of criterion validity. Results suggest the SLS may be sensitive to detecting subtle objective cognitive decline in preclinical AD.