ArticleNature medicine2010
The future of genetic research on neurodegeneration.
Article in Nature medicine, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.
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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Review
- Genetic analyses of early-onset Alzheimer's disease using next generation sequencing.Scientific reports · 2019Article
- Somatic alpha-synuclein mutations in Parkinson's disease: hypothesis and preliminary data.Movement disorders : official journal of the Movement Disorder Society · 2013Article
- Con: Alzheimer's disease and circadian dysfunction: chicken or egg?Alzheimer's research & therapy · 2012Article
- Neurovascular pathways to neurodegeneration in Alzheimer's disease and other disorders.Nature reviews. Neuroscience · 2011Review
- Genetics of dementia.Seminars in neurology · 2011Review
- Neurodegeneration and the neuroimmune system.Nature medicine · 2010Article
- Learning from genetic forms of neurodegeneration.Nature medicine · 2010Article
- Neurodegeneration and the neurovascular unit.Nature medicine · 2010Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Why, with all the progress in the field of neurodegeneration, do we still lack disease-modifying drugs that tackle the primary defect of severe cell loss? How much progress has been made toward this goal? Have we spent our time and resources wisely? And, most important, is there room for improvement? This commentary highlights several problems faced by researchers in studying the genetic etiology of neurodegenerative diseases and seeks to provide direction in overcoming some of these obstacles.
Indexed as
Identifiers
21052076What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.