ArticleAlzheimer's research & therapy2020
Is it time to use real-world data from primary care in Alzheimer's disease?
Article in Alzheimer's research & therapy, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Review
- Advances in Diagnostic Approaches for Alzheimer's Disease: From Biomarkers to Deep Learning Technology.CNS & neurological disorders drug targets · 2025Review
- Dementia and Parkinson's disease diagnoses in electronic health records vs. Medicare claims data: a study of 101,980 linked patients.BMC neurology · 2023Article
- Prevalence of treated patients with Alzheimer's disease: current trends and COVID-19 impact.Alzheimer's research & therapy · 2023Article
- Exploring the Involvement of the Amyloid Precursor Protein A673T Mutation against Amyloid Pathology and Alzheimer's Disease in Relation to Therapeutic Editing Tools.Pharmaceutics · 2022Review
- Cognitive Performance at Time of AD Diagnosis: A Clinically Augmented Register-Based Study.Frontiers in psychology · 2022Article
- Modifiable Barriers for Recruitment and Retention of Older Adults Participants from Underrepresented Minorities in Alzheimer's Disease Research.Journal of Alzheimer's disease : JAD · 2021Review
- Hospitalization and Socio-Health Care for Dementia in Spain.Journal of clinical medicine · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe analysis of real-world data in clinical research is rising, but its use to study dementia subtypes has been hardly addressed. We hypothesized that real-world data might be a powerful tool to update AD epidemiology at a lower cost than face-to-face studies, to estimate the prevalence and incidence rates of AD in Catalonia (Southern Europe), and to assess the adequacy of real-world data routinely collected in primary care settings for epidemiological research on AD.
methodsWe obtained data from the System for the Development of Research in Primary Care (SIDIAP) database, which contains anonymized information of > 80% of the Catalan population. We estimated crude and standardized incidence rates and prevalences (95% confidence intervals (CI)) of AD in people aged at least 65 years living in Catalonia in 2016.
resultsAge- and sex-standardized prevalence and incidence rate of AD were 3.1% (95%CI 2.7-3.6) and 4.2 per 1000 person-years (95%CI 3.8-4.6), respectively. Prevalence and incidence were higher in women and in the oldest people.
conclusionsOur incidence and prevalence estimations were slightly lower than the recent face-to-face studies conducted in Spain and higher than other analyses of electronic health data from other European populations. Real-world data routinely collected in primary care settings could be a powerful tool to study the epidemiology of AD.
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.