Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35203910›Full record

ReviewBrain sciences2022

Imaging Clinical Subtypes and Associated Brain Networks in Alzheimer's Disease.

Karl Herholz

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Brain sciences, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
0.7field-weighted citation impact, top 35% of its field
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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. 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 at 1 institution in 1 country.

Karl HerholzDivision of Experimental Psychology and Neuroscience, University of Manchester, Manchester M139PL, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-8658-0151
University of Manchester · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Alzheimer's disease (AD) does not present uniform symptoms or a uniform rate of progression in all cases. The classification of subtypes can be based on clinical symptoms or patterns of pathological brain alterations. Imaging techniques may allow for the identification of AD subtypes and their differentiation from other neurodegenerative diseases already at an early stage. In this review, the strengths and weaknesses of current clinical imaging methods are described. These include positron emission tomography (PET) to image cerebral glucose metabolism and pathological amyloid or tau deposits. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is more widely available than PET. It provides information on structural or functional changes in brain networks and their relation to AD subtypes. Amyloid PET provides a very early marker of AD but does not distinguish between AD subtypes. Regional patterns of pathology related to AD subtypes are observed with tau and glucose PET, and eventually as atrophy patterns on MRI. Structural and functional network changes occur early in AD but have not yet provided diagnostic specificity.

Indexed as

Alzheimer’s diseaseearly diagnosismagnetic resonance imagingpositron emission tomographyposterior cortical atrophyprogressive aphasia

Identifiers

PMID35203910
PMCPMC8869882
OpenAlexW4214594942

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.