Background: Telephone and videoconference administration of cognitive tests introduce additional sources of variance compared to in-person testing. Reviews of test-retest reliability have included mixed neurocognitive and psychiatric populations with limited consideration of methodological and statistical contributions. Objective: We reviewed reliability estimates from comparison studies of older adults with and without dementia, considering test-retest analyses and study methods. Methods: Medline, Embase, PsycINFO, and Web of Science were systematically searched from 1 January 2000 to 9 June 2020 for original articles comparing telephone or videoconference administered cognitive instruments to in-person administration in older adults with and without dementia or mild cognitive impairment. Results: Of 4,125 articles, 23 were included: 11 telephone (N = 2 dementia cohorts) and 12 videoconference (N = 4 dementia cohorts). Telephone administered subtest scores trended in the same direction as in-person with comparable means. Person-level data were scarce. Data on dementia was only available for MMSE, with resulting subtle modality bias. MMSE, SMMSE, Letter Fluency, and HVLT-R in healthy to mild-moderate Alzheimer’s disease were particularly reliable for videoconference administration. Other tests show promise but require more observations and comprehensive analyses. Most studies used high-speed stable videoconferencing hardware resulting in a lack of ecological validity for home administration. Conclusion: Remote administration is often consistent with in-person administration but variable and limited at the person/test level. Improved statistical design and inclusion of dementia related cohorts in telephone studies is recommended. Reliability evidence is stronger for videoconferencing but with limited applicability to home administration and severe dementia. Improved reporting of administrative procedures is recommended.

TeenCovidLife is part of Generation Scotland’s CovidLife projects, a set of longitudinal observational studies designed to assess the psychosocial and health impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic. TeenCovidLife focused on how adolescents in Scotland were coping during the pandemic. As of September 2021, Generation Scotland had conducted three TeenCovidLife surveys. Participants from previous surveys were invited to participate in the next, meaning the age ranges shifted over time. TeenCovidLife Survey 1 consists of data from 5,543 young people age 12 to 17, collected from 22 May to 5 July 2020, during the first school closures period in Scotland. TeenCovidLife Survey 2 consists of data from 2,245 young people aged 12 to 18, collected from 18 August to 14 October 2020, when the initial lockdown measures were beginning to ease, and schools reopened in Scotland. TeenCovidLife Survey 3 consists of data from 597 young people age 12 to 19, collected from 12 May to 27 June 2021, a year after the first survey, after the schools returned following the second lockdown in 2021. A total of 316 participants took part in all three surveys. TeenCovidLife collected data on general health and well-being, as well as topics specific to COVID-19, such as adherence to COVID-19 health guidance, feelings about school closures, and the impact of exam cancellations. Limited work has examined the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on young people. TeenCovidLife provides relevant and timely data to assess the impact of the pandemic on young people in Scotland. The dataset is available under authorised access from Generation Scotland; see the Generation Scotland website for more information.

TeenCovidLife is part of Generation Scotland’s CovidLife projects, a set of longitudinal observational studies designed to assess the psychosocial and health impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic. TeenCovidLife focused on how adolescents in Scotland were coping during the pandemic. As of September 2021, Generation Scotland had conducted three TeenCovidLife surveys. Participants from previous surveys were invited to participate in the next, meaning the age ranges shifted over time. TeenCovidLife Survey 1 consists of data from 5,543 young people age 12 to 17, collected from 22 May to 5 July 2020, during the first school closures period in Scotland. TeenCovidLife Survey 2 consists of data from 2,245 young people aged 12 to 18, collected from 18 August to 14 October 2020, when the initial lockdown measures were beginning to ease, and schools reopened in Scotland. TeenCovidLife Survey 3 consists of data from 597 young people age 12 to 19, collected from 12 May to 27 June 2021, a year after the first survey, after the schools returned following the second lockdown in 2021. A total of 316 participants took part in all three surveys. TeenCovidLife collected data on general health and well-being, as well as topics specific to COVID-19, such as adherence to COVID-19 health guidance, feelings about school closures, and the impact of exam cancellations. Limited work has examined the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on young people. TeenCovidLife provides relevant and timely data to assess the impact of the pandemic on young people in Scotland. The dataset is available under authorised access from Generation Scotland; see the Generation Scotland website for more information.

BACKGROUND Background: Harnessing the power of big data has unexplored potential in the field of dementia and brain health research. However, as interest in big data increases it is important to learn what the public understands about the use of their routinely collected healthcare data for research purposes, and their attitudes to such use. Participants’ data is increasingly collected in studies with open-data access processes in place, and through informed consent processes, participants show their willingness to share their data in this way. There remains an inherent flaw in research studies whereby the participants may not reflect the population at large representing a sampling bias. Access to medical records allows research studies to include a wholly representative sample. OBJECTIVE This study aimed to explore attitudes held by members of the public on the use of their healthcare data for dementia research purposes. METHODS Methods: Data was collected in a series of focus groups with semi-structured discussions. Transcripts from the focus groups were analysed using thematic analysis. RESULTS Results: Participants reported a willingness for their anonymised healthcare data to be accessed and used for research purposes, with some caveats for identifiable or highly sensitive data. Participants were happier for trusted organisations, such as the UK’s National Health Service and universities, to access their data compared to pharmaceutical companies. Clear and transparent communication about both the use of healthcare data in research studies and about study results was highlighted as important to participants. There was general misunderstanding about what healthcare data included and how researchers use healthcare data. CONCLUSIONS Conclusions: Overall, our findings underline the importance of clear communication to build trust and understand in the public about how their healthcare data can be used to support high quality dementia and brain health focussed data research. CLINICALTRIAL NA