Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21487954›Full record

ReviewCurrent neurology and neuroscience reports2011

Alzheimer's genetics in the GWAS era: a continuing story of 'replications and refutations'.

Lars Bertram

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Current neurology and neuroscience reports, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
5.2field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

15 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 40 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. At the interface of sensory and motor dysfunctions and Alzheimer's disease.Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association · 2015
    Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.

Lars BertramNeuropsychiatric Genetics Group, Department of Vertebrate Genomics, Max-Planck Institute for Molecular Genetics, Ihnestrasse 63, Room 204.1, 14195 Berlin, Germany. bertram@molgen.mpg.de
Max Planck Institute for Molecular Genetics · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

After a decade of intensive investigation but only few replicable results, Alzheimer's disease (AD) genetics research is slowly picking up pace. This is mostly owing to the completion of several genome-wide association studies (GWAS), which have suggested the existence of over three dozen potential new AD susceptibility genes. Although only a handful of these could be confirmed in subsequent independent replication efforts to date, this success rate is still much higher than in the pre-GWAS era. This review provides a brief summary of the principal methodologic advances in genetics research of the past decade, followed by a description of the most compelling findings that these advances have unearthed in AD. The paper closes with a discussion of the persistent methodologic difficulties and challenges and an outlook on what we can expect to gain from the next 10 years of AD genetics research.

Indexed as

Genome-Wide Association StudyAlzheimer DiseaseDNA Mutational AnalysisGenetic Predisposition to DiseaseGenome, HumanHumansMutationPolymorphism, Single Nucleotide

Identifiers

PMID21487954
OpenAlexW2017013704

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.