Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28373857›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in neurology2017

Alzheimer's Disease: Biomarkers in the Genome, Blood, and Cerebrospinal Fluid.

Rose Ann Huynh, Chandra Mohan

Abstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in neurology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 43 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
43citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

43 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Omics-based biomarkers discovery for Alzheimer's disease.Cellular and molecular life sciences : CMLS · 2022
    Review
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. 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

2 authors.

Rose Ann HuynhDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, University of Houston , Houston, TX , USA.
Chandra MohanDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, University of Houston , Houston, TX , USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Alzheimer's disease (AD) is a progressive neurodegenerative disorder that slowly destroys memory and thinking skills, resulting in behavioral changes. It is estimated that nearly 36 million are affected globally with numbers reaching 115 million by 2050. AD can only be definitively diagnosed at autopsy since its manifestations of senile plaques and neurofibrillary tangles throughout the brain cannot yet be fully captured with current imaging technologies. Current AD therapeutics have also been suboptimal. Besides identifying markers that distinguish AD from controls, there has been a recent drive to identify better biomarkers that can predict the rates of cognitive decline and neocortical amyloid burden in those who exhibit preclinical, prodromal, or clinical AD. This review covers biomarkers of three main types: genes, cerebrospinal fluid-derived, and blood-derived biomarkers. Looking ahead, cutting-edge OMICs technologies, including proteomics and metabolomics, ought to be fully tapped in order to mine even better biomarkers for AD that are more predictive.

Indexed as

Alzheimer’s diseaseblood-derived biomarkersearly detectiongenetic biomarkerslongitudinal studiesneurochemical biomarkers

Identifiers

PMID28373857
PMCPMC5357660

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.