ArticleThe Journal of international medical research2018
Considerations on accuracy, pattern and possible underlying factors of brain microbleed progression in older adults with absence or mild presence of vascular pathology.
Article in The Journal of international medical research, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Inherited risk of dementia and the progression of cerebral small vessel disease and inflammatory markers in cognitively healthy midlife adults: the PREVENT-Dementia study.Neurobiology of aging · 2021Article
- Association between Striatal Brain Iron Deposition, Microbleeds and Cognition 1 Year After a Minor Ischaemic Stroke.International journal of molecular sciences · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective To analyse brain microbleed (BMB) progression, its possible underlying factors, and the influence of inter-observer differences, in older individuals with none or mild vascular pathology. Methods This study analysed magnetic resonance images, cognitive, demographic and laboratory data from all individuals from the Alzheimer's Disease (AD) Neuroimaging Initiative database who had the required sequences for identifying BMBs over three consecutive years at the time the database was accessed (January 2016). BMBs were assessed independently by two observers with similar levels of experience. Results A total of 291 patients were included in the study. The number of individuals with BMBs and the number of BMBs per individual slightly and nonsignificantly increased across three consecutive years (Y1: 55/291 [19%]; Y2: 61/291 [21%]; Y3: 66/291 [23%]) with 1-2 BMBs and (Y1: 11/291 [4%]; Y2: 12/291 [4%]; Y3: 14/291 [5%]) with ≥ 3 BMBs. Both observers identified a similar pattern of BMB prevalence and progression in each cognitive group (normal < early/late mild cognitive impairment (MCI) > AD patients) despite inter-observer differences (1.5 BMBs, 95% confidence interval -3.7, 6.2], κ=0.543), which were mainly in the cortex. Serum cholesterol was the main predictor of change in BMB count between time-points but did not predict overall progression. Conclusions Inter-observer differences are always present and it is difficult to ascertain their influence in the analysis of BMB progression, which was observed in cognitively normal and MCI individuals, but not in AD patients. This should be confirmed in further studies.
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.