ArticlePloS one2020
Using practice effects for targeted trials or sub-group analysis in Alzheimer's disease: How practice effects predict change over time.
Article in PloS one, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 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
19 citing papers in PubMed.
- Longitudinal Changes in Cognitive Test Scores in Patients With Relapsing-Remitting Multiple Sclerosis: An Analysis of the DECIDE Dataset.Neurology · 2023Trial
- Treatment of Clinically Diagnosed Alzheimer's Disease by External Counterpulsation A Randomized Clinical Trial.American journal of Alzheimer's disease and other dementiasTrial
- Statistical models for Alzheimer's disease clinical trials: Lessons learned from the DIAN-TU Platform Trial.Journal of Alzheimer's disease : JAD · 2026Article
- Polygenic scores for executive functioning as predictors of performance improvements after repeated testing in major psychiatric disorders.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Development and comparison of alternate forms of the Loewenstein-Acevedo Scales for Semantic Interference and Learning-Digital Version (LASSI-D) in older participants with amnestic mild cognitive impairment and normal cognition.Journal of Alzheimer's disease : JAD · 2025Article
- Sex differences in cognitive trajectories and practice effects in a cohort of older Londoners: The role of risk factors.Journal of Alzheimer's disease : JAD · 2025Article
- Unlocking Cognitive Analysis Potential in Alzheimer's Disease Clinical Trials: Investigating Hierarchical Linear Models for Analyzing Novel Measurement Burst Design Data.Statistics in medicine · 2024Article
- Statistical considerations when estimating time-saving treatment effects in Alzheimer's disease clinical trials.Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association · 2024Article
- Novel measures of cognition and function for the AD spectrum in the Novel Measures for Alzheimer's Disease Prevention Trials (NoMAD) project: Psychometric properties, convergent validation, and contrasts with established measures.Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association · 2024Article
- Novel non-linear models for clinical trial analysis with longitudinal data: A tutorial using SAS for both frequentist and Bayesian methods.Statistics in medicine · 2024Article
- Examining amyloid reduction as a surrogate endpoint through latent class analysis using clinical trial data for dominantly inherited Alzheimer's disease.Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association · 2024Article
- Short-Term Practice Effects on Cognitive Tests Across the Late Life Cognitive Spectrum and How They Compare to Biomarkers of Alzheimer's Disease.Journal of Alzheimer's disease : JAD · 2024Article
- Why a clinical trial is as good as its outcome measure: A framework for the selection and use of cognitive outcome measures for clinical trials of Alzheimer's disease.Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association · 2023Article
- Practice effects in cognitive assessments three years later in non-carriers but not in symptom-free mutation carriers of autosomal-dominant Alzheimer's disease: Exemplifying procedural learning and memory?Frontiers in aging neuroscience · 2022Article
- Practice Effects in Mild Cognitive Impairment Increase Reversion Rates and Delay Detection of New Impairments.Frontiers in aging neuroscience · 2022Article
- Proportional constrained longitudinal data analysis models for clinical trials in sporadic Alzheimer's disease.Alzheimer's & dementia (New York, N. Y.) · 2022Article
- Analyzing large Alzheimer's disease cognitive datasets: Considerations and challenges.Alzheimer's & dementia (Amsterdam, Netherlands) · 2020Article
- Lower practice effects as a marker of cognitive performance and dementia risk: A literature review.Alzheimer's & dementia (Amsterdam, Netherlands) · 2020Article
- Implications of practice effects for the design of Alzheimer clinical trials.Alzheimer's & dementia (New York, N. Y.)Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo describe the presence of practice effects in persons with Alzheimer disease (AD) or mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and to evaluate how practice effects affect cognitive progression and the outcome of clinical trials.
methodsUsing data from a meta-database consisting of 18 studies including participants from the Alzheimer disease Cooperative Study (ADCS) and the Alzheimer Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (ADNI) with ADAS-Cog11 as the primary outcome, we defined practice effects based on the improvement in the first two ADAS-Cog11 scores and then estimated the presence of practice effects and compared the cognitive progression between participants with and without practice effects. The robustness of practice effects was investigated using CDR SB, an outcome independent the definition itself. Furthermore, we evaluated how practice effects can affect sample size estimation.
resultsThe overall percent of practice effects for AD participants was 39.0% and 53.3% for MCI participants. For AD studies, the mean change from baseline to 2 years was 12.8 points for the non-practice effects group vs 7.4 for the practice effects group; whereas for MCI studies, it was 4.1 for non-practice effects group vs 0.2 for the practice effects group. AD participants without practice effects progressed 0.9 points faster than those with practice effects over a period of 2 years in CDR-SB; whereas for MCI participants, the difference is 0.7 points. The sample sizes can be different by over 35% when estimated based on participants with/without practice effects.
conclusionPractice effects were prevalent and robust in persons with AD or MCI and affected the cognitive progression and sample size estimation. Planning of future AD or MCI clinical trials should account for practice effects to avoid underpower or considers target trials or stratification analysis based on practice effects.
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.