Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32047619›Full record

ReviewF1000Research2020

Classification of primary progressive aphasia: challenges and complexities.

Donna C Tippett

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in F1000Research, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 34 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
34citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Empathy in primary progressive aphasia: Neural signatures and longitudinal trajectories.Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association · 2026
    Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Clinicoradiological and neuropathological evaluation of primary progressive aphasia.Journal of neurology, neurosurgery, and psychiatry · 2024
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

1 author.

Donna C TippettDepartments of Neurology, Otolaryngology - Head and Neck Surgery, and Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland, 21287, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-9485-9745

Funding

Rehabilitation and Prophylaxis of Anomia in Primary Progressive AphasiaR01DC011317 · NIDCD · GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY · PI FRIEDMAN, RHONDA B, MEYER, AARON M · 2011 to 2021
$6.4M
NIDCD NIH HHS R01 DC011317
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Primary progressive aphasia (PPA) is classified into three variants, logopenic variant PPA (lvPPA), nonfluent agrammatic PPA (nfaPPA), and semantic variant PPA (svPPA), based on clinical (syndromic) characteristics with support from neuroimaging and/or underlying neuropathology. Classification of PPA variants provides information valuable to disease management. International consensus criteria are widely employed to identify PPA subtypes; however, classification is complex, and some individuals do not fit neatly into the subtyping scheme. In this review, diagnostic challenges and their implications are discussed, possible explanations for these challenges are explored, and approaches to address PPA classification are considered.

Indexed as

Aphasia, Primary ProgressiveHumanslogopenic variant primary progressive aphasianonfluent agrammatic primary progressive aphasiaprimary progressive aphasiasemantic varaint primary progressive aphasia

Identifiers

PMID32047619
PMCPMC6993834

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.