ReviewNeurology2013
Imaging markers for Alzheimer disease: which vs how.
Review in Neurology, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 90 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
90 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Diagnostic potential of near-infrared spectroscopy in mild cognitive impairment and neurodegenerative disorders: Implications for resource-limited settings.Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association · 2025Pooled it
- Structural magnetic resonance imaging for the early diagnosis of dementia due to Alzheimer's disease in people with mild cognitive impairment.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2020Pooled it
- 18F-FDG PET for Prediction of Conversion to Alzheimer's Disease Dementia in People with Mild Cognitive Impairment: An Updated Systematic Review of Test Accuracy.Journal of Alzheimer's disease : JAD · 2018Pooled it
- ¹⁸F-FDG PET for the early diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease dementia and other dementias in people with mild cognitive impairment (MCI).The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2015Pooled it
- Trial
- Randomized trial on the effects of a combined physical/cognitive training in aged MCI subjects: the Train the Brain study.Scientific reports · 2017Trial
- Frontal Release Signs and Future Decline in Research Participants With Intact Cognition.JAMA network open · 2026Article
- Decoupling MCI-specific signatures from shared neurobiological substrates of cognitive aging via deep learning.NPJ digital medicine · 2026Article
- Simultaneous multiple post-labelling delay ASL MRI and [European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2026Article
- Brain volumes discriminate clinical dementia rating scale categories.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Translating Alzheimer's Disease Mechanisms into Therapeutic Opportunities.Biomolecules · 2025Review
- Subcortical gray matter volumes and 5-year dementia risk in individuals with subjective cognitive decline or mild cognitive impairment: A multi-cohort analysis.Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association · 2025Article
- Biomarkers in Alzheimer's disease: Emerging trends and clinical implications.Chinese medical journal · 2025Article
- Brain perfusion SPECT in dementia: what radiologists should know.Japanese journal of radiology · 2024Review
- Current Trends and Applications of PET/MRI Hybrid Imaging in Neurodegenerative Diseases and Normal Aging.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
- Can Brain Volume-Driven Characteristic Features Predict the Response of Alzheimer's Patients to Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation? A Pilot Study.Brain sciences · 2024Article
- Characterizing age- and sex-related differences in brain structure among middle-aged and older Hispanic/Latino adults in the study of Latinos- investigation of neurocognitive aging magnetic resonance imaging (SOL-INCA MRI).Neurobiology of aging · 2023Article
- Could Temperamental Features Modulate Participation in Clinical Trials?Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
- Brain PET Imaging: Approach to Cognitive Impairment and Dementia.PET clinics · 2023Review
- Pathological functional impairment: Neuropsychological correlates of the shared variance between everyday functioning and brain volumetrics.Frontiers in aging neuroscience · 2022Article
30 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
26 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Revised diagnostic criteria for Alzheimer disease (AD) acknowledge a key role of imaging biomarkers for early diagnosis. Diagnostic accuracy depends on which marker (i.e., amyloid imaging, ¹⁸F-fluorodeoxyglucose [FDG]-PET, SPECT, MRI) as well as how it is measured ("metric": visual, manual, semiautomated, or automated segmentation/computation). We evaluated diagnostic accuracy of marker vs metric in separating AD from healthy and prognostic accuracy to predict progression in mild cognitive impairment. The outcome measure was positive (negative) likelihood ratio, LR+ (LR-), defined as the ratio between the probability of positive (negative) test outcome in patients and the probability of positive (negative) test outcome in healthy controls. Diagnostic LR+ of markers was between 4.4 and 9.4 and LR- between 0.25 and 0.08, whereas prognostic LR+ and LR- were between 1.7 and 7.5, and 0.50 and 0.11, respectively. Within metrics, LRs varied up to 100-fold: LR+ from approximately 1 to 100; LR- from approximately 1.00 to 0.01. Markers accounted for 11% and 18% of diagnostic and prognostic variance of LR+ and 16% and 24% of LR-. Across all markers, metrics accounted for an equal or larger amount of variance than markers: 13% and 62% of diagnostic and prognostic variance of LR+, and 29% and 18% of LR-. Within markers, the largest proportion of diagnostic LR+ and LR- variability was within ¹⁸F-FDG-PET and MRI metrics, respectively. Diagnostic and prognostic accuracy of imaging AD biomarkers is at least as dependent on how the biomarker is measured as on the biomarker itself. Standard operating procedures are key to biomarker use in the clinical routine and drug trials.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.