Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29780863›Full record

ArticleAlzheimer's & dementia (Amsterdam, Netherlands)2018

A novel cognitive-functional composite measure to detect changes in early Alzheimer's disease: Test-retest reliability and feasibility.

Roos J Jutten, John Harrison, Philippe R Lee Meeuw Kjoe, Esther M Opmeer, Niki S M Schoonenboom, Frank Jan de Jong, Craig W Ritchie, Philip Scheltens, Sietske A M Sikkes

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Alzheimer's & dementia (Amsterdam, Netherlands), 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
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

9 authors.

Roos J JuttenAlzheimer Center, Department of Neurology, VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam Neuroscience, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
John HarrisonAlzheimer Center, Department of Neurology, VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam Neuroscience, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Philippe R Lee Meeuw KjoeAlzheimer Center, Department of Neurology, VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam Neuroscience, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Esther M OpmeerDepartment of Neurosciences, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
Niki S M SchoonenboomDepartment of Neurology, Spaarne Gasthuis, Haarlem, The Netherlands.
Frank Jan de JongDepartment of Neurology, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Craig W RitchieCentre for Dementia Prevention, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, United Kingdom.
Philip ScheltensAlzheimer Center, Department of Neurology, VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam Neuroscience, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Sietske A M SikkesAlzheimer Center, Department of Neurology, VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam Neuroscience, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionTo improve the detection of changes in Alzheimer's disease (AD), we designed the cognitive-functional composite (CFC). As a first validation step, we investigated its test-retest reliability and feasibility of use.

methodsWe performed a test-retest study with 2-3 weeks between assessments, including patients with mild cognitive impairment (MCI) or mild AD dementia and cognitively healthy participants. We calculated intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) type absolute agreement for all CFC measures and compared baseline and retest scores using paired-samples

resultsForty-three patients (40% female, mean age = 69.9) and 30 controls (50% female, mean age = 65) were included. Subtest intraclass correlation coefficients ranged from .70 to .96. We found negligible improvements after retesting on only two subtests. Overall, patients perceived the administration of the CFC as feasible. DISCUSSION: The CFC is a stable and feasible measure in MCI and mild AD dementia, and thereby meets important quality metrics for clinically meaningful outcome measures.

Indexed as

Activities of daily livingAlzheimer's diseaseCognitionFeasibilityOutcome measuresTest–retest reliability

Identifiers

PMID29780863
PMCPMC5956799

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.