Usability and Concurrent Validity of the Gamified Brain Aging Monitor of Cognition (BAMCOG) for the Self-Monitoring of Perioperative Cognitive Function: A Pilot Study
Abstract
1. Introduction
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Montreal Cognitive Assessment [24]
2.2. BAMCOG
3. Results
4. Discussion
4.1. Limitations
4.2. Recommendations
5. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
Abbreviations
| AD8 | Eight-item Informant Interview to Differentiate Aging and Dementia |
| BAMCOG | Brain Aging Monitor Cognitive Assessment Battery |
| CI | Confidence Intervals |
| MCI | Mild Cognitive Impairment |
| MoCA | Montreal Cognitive Assessment |
| SD | Standard Deviation |
| SUS | System Usability Scale |
| TAVR | Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement |
| TICS-M | Modified Telephone Interview for Cognitive Status |
References
- Crosby, G.; Culley, D.J.; Hyman, B.T. Preoperative cognitive assessment of the elderly surgical patient: A call for action. Anesthesiology 2011, 114, 1265–1268. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chow, W.B.; Rosenthal, R.A.; Merkow, R.P.; Ko, C.Y.; Esnaola, N.F. Optimal preoperative assessment of the geriatric surgical patient: A best practices guideline from the American college of surgeons national surgical quality improvement program and the American geriatrics society. J. Am. Coll. Surg. 2012, 215, 453–466. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Schenning, K.J.; Deiner, S.G. Postoperative Delirium in the Geriatric Patient. Anesthesiol. Clin. 2015, 33, 505–516. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gill, T.M.; Wyk, B.V.; Leo-Summers, L.; Murphy, T.E.; Becher, R.D. Population-Based Estimates of 1-Year Mortality After Major Surgery Among Community-Living Older US Adults. JAMA Surg. 2022, 157, e225155. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Davydow, D.S.; Zivin, K.; Langa, K.M. Hospitalization, depression and dementia in community-dwelling older Americans: Findings from the national health and aging trends study. Gen. Hosp. Psychiatry 2014, 36, 135–141. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Florido-Santiago, M.; Pérez-Belmonte, L.; Osuna-Sánchez, J.; Barbancho, M.; Ricci, M.; Millán-Gómez, M.; Bernal-López, M.; Gómez-Huelgas, R.; Lara, J. Assessment of long-term cognitive dysfunction in older patients who undergo heart surgery. Neurologia 2021, 38, 399–404. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bartels, K.; Li, Y.-J.; Li, Y.-W.; White, W.D.; Laskowitz, D.T.; Kertai, M.D.; Stafford-Smith, M.; Podgoreanu, M.V.; Newman, M.F.; Mathew, J.P. Apolipoprotein epsilon 4 genotype is associated with less improvement in cognitive function five years after cardiac surgery: A retrospective cohort study. Can. J. Anaesth. 2015, 62, 618–626. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gan, S.; Yu, Y.; Wu, J.; Tang, X.; Zheng, Y.; Wang, M.; Zhu, S. Preoperative assessment of cognitive function and risk assessment of cognitive impairment in elderly patients with orthopedics: A cross-sectional study. BMC Anesthesiol. 2020, 20, 189. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Langa, K.M.; Levine, D.A. The diagnosis and management of mild cognitive impairment: A clinical review. JAMA 2014, 312, 2551–2561. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Salari, N.; Lotfi, F.; Abdolmaleki, A.; Heidarian, P.; Rasoulpoor, S.; Fazeli, J.; Najafi, H.; Mohammadi, M. The global prevalence of mild cognitive impairment in geriatric population with emphasis on influential factors: A systematic review and meta-analysis. BMC Geriatr. 2025, 25, 313. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Pas, M.T.; Rikkert, M.O.; Bouwman, A.; Kessels, R.; Buise, M. Screening for Mild Cognitive Impairment in the Preoperative Setting: A Narrative Review. Healthcare 2022, 10, 1112. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lumsden, J.; Edwards, E.A.; Lawrence, N.S.; Coyle, D.; Munafò, M.R. Gamification of Cognitive Assessment and Cognitive Training: A Systematic Review of Applications and Efficacy. JMIR Serious Games 2016, 4, e5888. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Deterding, S.; Dixon, D.; Khaled, R.; Nacke, L. From Game Design Elements to Gamefulness: Defining ‘Gamification’. In Proceedings of the 15th International Academic MindTrek Conference: Envisioning Future Media Environments, MindTrek 2011; Association for Computing Machinery: New York, NY, USA, 2011; pp. 9–15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Vogels, E.A. Millennials Stand Out for Their Technology Use. Available online: https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2019/09/09/us-generations-technology-use/ (accessed on 22 May 2024).
- Thompson, L.I.; Kunicki, Z.J.; Emrani, S.; Strenger, J.; De Vito, A.N.; Britton, K.J.; Dion, C.; Harrington, K.D.; Roque, N.; Salloway, S.; et al. Remote and in-clinic digital cognitive screening tools outperform the MoCA to distinguish cerebral amyloid status among cognitively healthy older adults. Alzheimer’s Dement. Diagn. Assess. Dis. Monit. 2023, 15, e12500. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Öhman, F.; Hassenstab, J.; Berron, D.; Schöll, M.; Papp, K.V. Current advances in digital cognitive assessment for preclinical Alzheimer’s disease. Alzheimers Dement. 2021, 13, e12217. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Aalbers, T.; Baars, M.A.E.; Rikkert, M.G.M.O.; Kessels, R.P.C. Puzzling with online games (BAM-COG): Reliability, validity, and feasibility of an online self-monitor for cognitive performance in aging adults. J. Med Internet Res. 2013, 15, e270. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- van der Wulp, K.; van Wely, M.; van Heijningen, L.; van Bakel, B.; Schoon, Y.; Verkroost, M.; Gehlmann, H.; Van Garsse, L.; Vart, P.; Kievit, P.; et al. Delirium After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation Under General Anesthesia: Incidence, Predictors, and Relation to Long-Term Survival. J. Am. Geriatr. Soc. 2019, 67, 2325–2330. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Milani, S.A.; Marsiske, M.; Cottler, L.B.; Chen, X.; Striley, C.W. Optimal cutoffs for the Montreal Cognitive Assessment vary by race and ethnicity. Alzheimer’s Dement. Diagn. Assess. Dis. Monit. 2018, 10, 773. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tan, J.; Li, N.; Gao, J.; Wang, L.-N.; Zhao, Y.-M.; Yu, B.-C.; Du, W.; Zhang, W.-J.; Cui, L.-Q.; Wang, Q.-S.; et al. Optimal cutoff scores for dementia and mild cognitive impairment of the Montreal Cognitive Assessment among elderly and oldest-old Chinese population. J. Alzheimer’s Dis. 2015, 43, 1403–1412. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Crouch, M.; McKenzie, H. The logic of small samples in interview-based qualitative research. Soc. Sci. Inf. 2006, 45, 483–499. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hajesmaeel-Gohari, S.; Bahaadinbeigy, K. The most used questionnaires for evaluating telemedicine services. BMC Med. Inform. Decis. Mak. 2021, 21, 36. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bangor, A.; Kortum, P.T.; Miller, J.T. An Empirical Evaluation of the System Usability Scale. Int. J. Hum. Comput. Interact. 2008, 24, 574–594. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- MoCA Montreal-Cognitive Assessment. About. Available online: https://www.mocatest.org/about/ (accessed on 13 May 2020).
- Nasreddine, Z.S.; Phillips, N.A.; Bédirian, V.; Charbonneau, S.; Whitehead, V.; Collin, I.; Cummings, J.L.; Chertkow, H. The Montreal Cognitive Assessment, MoCA: A brief screening tool for mild cognitive impairment. J. Am. Geriatr. Soc. 2005, 53, 695–699, Corrigendum in J. Am. Geriatr. Soc. 2019, 67, 1991. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Freitas, S.; Simões, M.R.; Alves, L.; Santana, I. Montreal cognitive assessment: Validation study for mild cognitive impairment and Alzheimer disease. Alzheimer Dis. Assoc. Disord. 2013, 27, 37–43. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Fujiwara, Y.; Suzuki, H.; Yasunaga, M.; Sugiyama, M.; Ijuin, M.; Sakuma, N.; Inagaki, H.; Iwasa, H.; Ura, C.; Yatomi, N.; et al. Brief screening tool for mild cognitive impairment in older Japanese: Validation of the Japanese version of the Montreal Cognitive Assessment. Geriatr. Gerontol. Int. 2010, 10, 225–232. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Sokolowska, N.; Sokolowski, R.; Polak-Szabela, A.; Mazur, E.; Podhorecka, M.; Kedziora-Kornatowska, K. Comparison of the effectiveness of the Montreal Cognitive Assessment 7.2 and the Mini-Mental State Examination in the detection of mild neurocognitive disorder in people over 60 years of age. Preliminary study. Psychiatr. Pol. 2018, 52, 843–857. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Unity. Unity, Game Development Software: Create 2D & 3D Games. Available online: https://unity.com/games (accessed on 26 February 2024).
- Verhage, F. Intelligentie en Leeftijd bij Volwassenen en Bejaarden. Ph.D. Thesis, Koninklijke Van Gorcum, Groningen, The Netherlands, 1964; p. 98. Available online: https://research.rug.nl/en/publications/intelligentie-en-leeftijd-bij-volwassenen-en-bejaarden (accessed on 29 January 2024).
- Goulart, A.A.; Lucatelli, A.; Silveira, P.S.P.; Siqueira, J.d.O.; Pereira, V.F.A.; Carmona, M.J.C.; Valentin, L.S.S.; Vieira, J.E. Comparison of digital games as a cognitive function assessment tool for current standardized neuropsychological tests. Braz. J. Anesthesiol. 2022, 72, 13–20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rabbitt, P.; Diggle, P.; Smith, D.; Holland, F.; Innes, L.M. Identifying and separating the effects of practice and of cognitive ageing during a large longitudinal study of elderly community residents. Neuropsychologia 2001, 39, 532–543. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jutten, R.J.; Grandoit, E.; Foldi, N.S.; Sikkes, S.A.M.; Jones, R.N.; Choi, S.; Lamar, M.L.; Louden, D.K.N.; Rich, J.; Tommet, D.; et al. Lower practice effects as a marker of cognitive performance and dementia risk: A literature review. Alzheimers Dement. 2020, 12, e12055. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Guhn, M.; Forer, B.; Zumbo, B.D. Reliable Change Index. In Encyclopedia of Quality of Life and Well-Being Research; Michalos, A.C., Ed.; Springer: Dordrecht, The Netherlands, 2014; pp. 5459–5462. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]






| Characteristic | First Part, N = 8 (%) | Second Part, N = 40 (%) |
|---|---|---|
| Male | 6 (75) | 22 (55) |
| Mean age in years (SD) | 86.0 (3.9) | 79.2 (6.0) |
| 65–69 | - | 3 (7.5) |
| 70–74 | - | 5 (12.5) |
| 75–79 | - | 12 (30) |
| 80–84 | 3 (38) | 11 (27.5) |
| 85–89 | 4 (50) | 8 (20) |
| 90–94 | 1 (12) | 1 (2.5) |
| Mean MoCA score (SD) | 26.3 (0.7) | - |
| Mean SUS score (SD) | 79.7 (9.0) | - |
| General Anesthesia | - | 12 (30) |
| Local Anesthesia | - | 28 (70) |
| ASA 3 | - | 11 (27.5) |
| ASA 4 | - | 29 (72.5) |
| Mean level of education (SD) * | - | 4.4 (1.8) |
| Low (1–4) | - | 15 (37.5) |
| Average (5) | - | 14 (35) |
| High (6–7) | - | 11 (27.5) |
| Estimate | 95%CI | p-Value | |
|---|---|---|---|
| MoCA | |||
| Intercept | 26.3 | 23.5–29.1 | <0.001 |
| 1 day postoperative | −2.5 | −2.4–0.3 | 0.012 |
| 3 months postoperative | −1.3 | −3.8–−1.3 | <0.001 |
| Male | −1.1 | −2.8–0.5 | 0.181 |
| Average level of education * | 1.5 | −0.3–3.3 | 0.093 |
| High level of education * | 3.7 | 1.7–5.7 | <0.001 |
| Mean age (years) | |||
| 70–74 | −2.3 | −5.8–1.2 | 0.191 |
| 75–79 | −2.3 | −5.4–0.9 | 0.153 |
| 80–84 | −3.7 | −6.8–−0.6 | <0.05 |
| 85–89 | −5.3 | −8.5–−2.1 | <0.05 |
| 90–94 | −2.7 | −8.2–2.8 | 0.325 |
| BAMCOG | |||
| Intercept | 45.6 | 28.9–62.3 | <0.001 |
| 1 day postoperative | −0.05 | −5.8–5.7 | 1.0 |
| 3 months postoperative | 11.2 | 5.5–16.9 | <0.001 |
| Male | 8.2 | −1.7–18.1 | 0.103 |
| Average level of education * | 0.8 | −9.9–11.5 | 0.881 |
| High level of education * | 16.1 | 4.2–28.0 | <0.05 |
| Mean age (years) | |||
| 70–74 | −31.6 | −52.4–−10.8 | 0.004 |
| 75–79 | −19.4 | −38.0–−0.7 | 0.043 |
| 80–84 | −34.6 | −52.8–−16.4 | <0.001 |
| 85–89 | −34.2 | −53.3–−15.1 | <0.001 |
| 90–94 | −38.5 | −71.5–−5.5 | 0.024 |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2025 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
te Pas, M.E.; Bouwman, R.A.; Olde Rikkert, M.G.M.; Oosterbos, E.; Tonino, P.A.L.; Jansen, S.W.M.; Kessels, R.P.C.; Buise, M.P. Usability and Concurrent Validity of the Gamified Brain Aging Monitor of Cognition (BAMCOG) for the Self-Monitoring of Perioperative Cognitive Function: A Pilot Study. Brain Sci. 2025, 15, 1342. https://doi.org/10.3390/brainsci15121342
te Pas ME, Bouwman RA, Olde Rikkert MGM, Oosterbos E, Tonino PAL, Jansen SWM, Kessels RPC, Buise MP. Usability and Concurrent Validity of the Gamified Brain Aging Monitor of Cognition (BAMCOG) for the Self-Monitoring of Perioperative Cognitive Function: A Pilot Study. Brain Sciences. 2025; 15(12):1342. https://doi.org/10.3390/brainsci15121342
Chicago/Turabian Stylete Pas, Mariska E., R. Arthur Bouwman, Marcel G. M. Olde Rikkert, Erwin Oosterbos, Pim A. L. Tonino, Steffy W. M. Jansen, Roy P. C. Kessels, and Marc P. Buise. 2025. "Usability and Concurrent Validity of the Gamified Brain Aging Monitor of Cognition (BAMCOG) for the Self-Monitoring of Perioperative Cognitive Function: A Pilot Study" Brain Sciences 15, no. 12: 1342. https://doi.org/10.3390/brainsci15121342
APA Stylete Pas, M. E., Bouwman, R. A., Olde Rikkert, M. G. M., Oosterbos, E., Tonino, P. A. L., Jansen, S. W. M., Kessels, R. P. C., & Buise, M. P. (2025). Usability and Concurrent Validity of the Gamified Brain Aging Monitor of Cognition (BAMCOG) for the Self-Monitoring of Perioperative Cognitive Function: A Pilot Study. Brain Sciences, 15(12), 1342. https://doi.org/10.3390/brainsci15121342

