Psychometric evidence of digital and online executive function tests: a systematic review

This systematic review maps and synthesizes psychometric evidence from the past decade on digital and online tools assessing executive functions (EF) in healthy adults. It examines six contemporary domains of validity: content validity, structural validity, external validity, response processes, consequential validity, and reliability. Searches across PsycNet, PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and the Virtual Health Library followed PRISMA guidelines. Thirty-one studies met inclusion criteria, encompassing 11,246 participants. Most tools assessed core EF domains—working memory, inhibition, and cognitive flexibility—through performance-based tasks or online questionnaires. Reliability was reported in 23 studies, though often via single indices. Content validity appeared in 26 studies but frequently lacked methodological rigor. Structural and external validity were reported in 8 and 17 studies, respectively. Evidence regarding response processes (k = 22) and consequential validity (k = 31) was commonly cited but rarely examined in depth. No study comprehensively addressed all six domains. Risk of bias was low for administration but high for participant selection, and applicability concerns included unrepresentative samples and limited construct alignment. Overall, although digital EF assessment is expanding, psychometric validation remains uneven across key domains.