ArticleJournal of Alzheimer's disease : JAD2016
Brain Stimulation in Alzheimer's Disease.
Article in Journal of Alzheimer's disease : JAD, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- A systematic review and meta-analysis of transcranial direct-current stimulation effects on cognitive function in patients with Alzheimer's disease.Molecular psychiatry · 2022Pooled it
- Physical mechanisms of human brain functions.Quantitative biology (Beijing, China) · 2025Review
- Vagus nerve stimulation in dementia: A scoping review of clinical and pre-clinical studies.AIMS neuroscience · 2024Article
- Intracranial alternating current stimulation facilitates neurogenesis in a mouse model of Alzheimer's disease.Alzheimer's research & therapy · 2020Article
- Modulation of Human Memory by Deep Brain Stimulation of the Entorhinal-Hippocampal Circuitry.Neuron · 2020Review
- Emerging medical applications based on non-ionizing electromagnetic fields from 0 Hz to 10 THz.Medical devices (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2019Article
- Opening the debate on deep brain stimulation for Alzheimer disease - a critical evaluation of rationale, shortcomings, and ethical justification.BMC medical ethics · 2018Article
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 at 1 institution in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Deep brain stimulation has been successfully used in treatment of motor symptoms of Parkinson's disease and other movement disorders. In a recent multi-center prospectively randomized study, deep brain stimulation of the fornix was administered in order to ameliorate the cognitive symptoms and clinical course of Alzheimer's disease (AD). The study points to the possibility of modest slowing of the cognitive decline in AD in a subset of patients older than 65, while at the same time highlights the risk of stimulation in exacerbation of this decline in younger patients. The logic of conducting large clinical trials in the face of limited scientific understanding of the pathophysiology of AD and response of affected brain regions to electrical stimulation, is discussed with emphasis on the need to conduct: (i) animal studies in AD models, using precise focused stimulation; (ii) studies in patients who are implanted with depth electrodes for established clinical reasons (i.e., patients with epilepsy or movement disorders); and (iii) smaller adaptive studies in AD patients with systematic alterations of therapeutic parameters such as stimulation protocol.
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.