ArticleNeurology and therapy2022
Clinical Staging of Alzheimer's Disease: Concordance of Subjective and Objective Assessments in the Veteran's Affairs Healthcare System.
Article in Neurology and therapy, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Prevalence and factors associated with seizures among patients with dementia: A retrospective clinic-based study.Epilepsia open · 2025Article
- The Role of Mental Health Conditions in Early Detection and Treatment of Veterans With Alzheimer's Dementia.Military medicine · 2024Article
- Prevalence Estimation of Dementia/Alzheimer's Disease Using Health and Retirement Study Database in the United States.The journal of prevention of Alzheimer's disease · 2024Article
- Prevalence of Mild Cognitive Impairment and Alzheimer's Disease Identified in Veterans in the United States.Journal of Alzheimer's disease : JAD · 2024Article
- Assessing Quality of Life, Economic Burden, and Independence Across the Alzheimer's Disease Continuum Using Patient-Caregiver Dyad Surveys.Journal of Alzheimer's disease : JAD · 2024Article
- Rule-Based Identification of Individuals with Mild Cognitive Impairment or Alzheimer's Disease Using Clinical Notes from the United States Veterans Affairs Healthcare System.Neurology and therapy · 2023Article
- Clinical and Scientific Challenges to Effectiveness Studies Under Coverage with Evidence Development in Alzheimer's Disease.Neurology and therapy · 2023Article
- Comorbidities and apolipoprotein E genotypes of patients with mild cognitive impairment in transition to Alzheimer's disease.Journal of Alzheimer's disease reportsArticle
- Anti-amyloid therapy eligibility in a longitudinal brain-donor cohort withAlzheimer's & dementia (Amsterdam, Netherlands)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
9 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
introductionUncertainty surrounding the accurate assessment of the early-stage Alzheimer's disease (AD) may cause delayed care and inappropriate patient access to new AD therapies.
methodsTo analyze clinical assessments of patients with AD in the Veteran's Affairs (VA) Healthcare System and evaluate concordance between subjective and objective assessments, we processed clinical notes extracted by text integration utilities between April 1, 2008 and October 14, 2021. Veterans who had mild, moderate, or severe AD with clinical notes documenting both clinician's judgement of AD severity and objective test scores from the Mini-Mental State Examination or the Montreal Cognitive Assessment were included. Using clinician-defined severity cohorts, we determined concordance between the clinician's (subjective) assessments and the test-derived (objective) assessments of AD severity. Concordance was assessed over time and by selected symptoms and comorbidities, as well as healthcare system factors.
resultsA total of 8888 notes were initially extracted; the final analysis sample included 7514 notes corresponding to 4469 unique patients (mean [standard deviation] age of 78 [9] years; 96.5% male; 77.8% White). Subjective and objective assessments were concordant in approximately half (53%) of overall notes. In the mild Alzheimer's cohort, patients were assessed to have more severe disease by objective test scores in 40% of notes. Concordance varied about 21-73%, 47-58%, and 40-64% across symptoms/comorbidities, clinician types, and Veteran's Integrated Service Networks, respectively. The proportion of concordant notes was higher in visits to dementia (61%) instead of non-dementia clinics (53%).
conclusionsWe found higher concordance between clinician's assessment and test-based assessment of Alzheimer's disease severity in dementia specialty clinics. Discordance is especially high for the subjectively assessed mild AD cohort where objective assessments showed a higher severity level in 40% of notes. These data indicate a critical need for improved understanding of clinical assessments and decision-making to identify appropriate patients for anti-amyloid therapy.
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.