Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22499452›Full record

ReviewThe journal of nutrition, health & aging2012

Recruitment methods for United States Alzheimer disease prevention trials.

L S Schneider

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in The journal of nutrition, health & aging, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

18 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Attitudes toward Potential Participant Registries.Journal of Alzheimer's disease : JAD · 2017
    Article
  13. Recruiting Community-Based Dementia Patients and Caregivers in a Nonpharmacologic Randomized Trial: What Works and How Much Does It Cost?Journal of applied gerontology : the official journal of the Southern Gerontological Society · 2016
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Facilitating Alzheimer disease research recruitment.Alzheimer disease and associated disorders
    Review
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.

L S SchneiderUniversity of Southern California Keck School of Medicine, Los Angeles, CA 90033, USA. lschneid@usc.edu

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

There are no substantially effective treatments or preventatives for Alzheimer disease. The few prevention trials that were undertaken did not shown efficacy for the drugs tested; but, nevertheless, advanced prevention trials methods. We review past recruitment methods and discuss areas for improvement. Improvements in recruitment methods can enhance the likelihood for accurately demonstrating the efficacy of an effective drug. Effective therapeutics to prevent AD await discovery and proof.

Indexed as

Patient SelectionAlzheimer DiseaseBiomarkersClinical Trials as TopicHumansResearch DesignTreatment OutcomeUnited StatesBiomarkers

Identifiers

PMID22499452
PMCPMC12878103

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.