Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31388557›Full record

ArticleAlzheimer's & dementia (Amsterdam, Netherlands)2019

Added value of amyloid PET in individualized risk predictions for MCI patients.

Ingrid S van Maurik, Laura M van der Kall, Arno de Wilde, Femke H Bouwman, Philip Scheltens, Bart N M van Berckel, Johannes Berkhof, Wiesje M van der Flier

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Alzheimer's & dementia (Amsterdam, Netherlands), 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Observational
  12. Biomarker testing in MCI patients-deciding who to test.Alzheimer's research & therapy · 2021
    Article
  13. Article
  14. 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

8 authors.

Ingrid S van MaurikDepartment of Neurology, Alzheimer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam Neuroscience, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Laura M van der KallDepartment of Neurology, Alzheimer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam Neuroscience, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Arno de WildeDepartment of Neurology, Alzheimer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam Neuroscience, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Femke H BouwmanDepartment of Neurology, Alzheimer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam Neuroscience, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Philip ScheltensDepartment of Neurology, Alzheimer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam Neuroscience, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Bart N M van BerckelDepartment of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Johannes BerkhofDepartment of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Wiesje M van der FlierDepartment of Neurology, Alzheimer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam Neuroscience, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionTo construct a prognostic model based on amyloid positron emission tomography (PET) to predict clinical progression in individual patients with mild cognitive impairment (MCI).

methodsWe included 411 MCI patients from the Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative. Prognostic models were constructed with Cox regression with demographics, magnetic resonance imaging, and/or amyloid PET to predict progression to Alzheimer's disease dementia. The models were validated in the Amsterdam Dementia Cohort.

resultsThe combined model (Harrell's C = 0.82 [0.78-0.86]) was significantly superior to demographics (β = 0.100, DISCUSSION: The present study facilitates the interpretation of an amyloid PET result in the context of a patient's own characteristics and clinical assessment.

Indexed as

Alzheimer's diseaseAmyloid positron emission tomographyBiomarkersMCIProgression

Identifiers

PMID31388557
PMCPMC6667768

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.