Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37742651›Full record

ArticleJournal of Alzheimer's disease : JAD2023

Reconceptualization of the Erlangen Score for the Assessment of Dementia Risk: The ERlangen Score.

Janine Utz, Pauline Olm, Johannes Jablonowski, Eva-Maria Siegmann, Philipp Spitzer, Piotr Lewczuk, Johannes Kornhuber, Juan Manuel Maler, Timo Jan Oberstein

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of Alzheimer's disease : JAD, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
0.4field-weighted citation impact, top 36% 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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. 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

9 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Janine UtzDepartment of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, Erlangen, Bayern, Germany.
Pauline OlmDepartment of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, Erlangen, Bayern, Germany.
Johannes JablonowskiDepartment of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, Erlangen, Bayern, Germany.
Eva-Maria SiegmannDepartment of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, Erlangen, Bayern, Germany.
Philipp SpitzerDepartment of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, Erlangen, Bayern, Germany.
Piotr LewczukDepartment of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, Erlangen, Bayern, Germany.
Johannes KornhuberDepartment of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, Erlangen, Bayern, Germany.
Juan Manuel MalerDepartment of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, Erlangen, Bayern, Germany.
Timo Jan ObersteinDepartment of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, Erlangen, Bayern, Germany.
Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg · DEMedical University of Białystok · PL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe established Erlangen Score (ES) for the interpretation of cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) biomarkers in the diagnostics of Alzheimer's disease (AD) uses markers of amyloidopathy and tauopathy, equally weighted to form an easy-interpretable ordinal scale. However, these biomarkers are not equally predictive for AD.

objectiveThe higher weighting of the Aβ42/Aβ40 ratio, as a reconceptualized ERlangen Score (ERS), was tested for advantages in diagnostic performance.

methodsNon-demented subjects (N = 154) with a mean follow up of 5 years were assigned to a group ranging from 0 to 4 in ES or ERS. Psychometric trajectories and dementia risk were assessed.

resultsThe distribution of subjects between ES and ERS among the groups differed considerably, as grouping allocated 32 subjects to ES group 2, but only 2 to ERS group 2. The discriminative accuracy between the ES (AUC 73.2%, 95% CI [64.2, 82.2]) and ERS (AUC 72.0%, 95% CI [63.1, 81.0]) for dementia risk showed no significant difference. Without consideration of the Aβ42/Aβ40 ratio in ES grouping, the optimal cut-off of the ES shifted to ≥2.

conclusionsThe ERS showed advantages over the ES in test interpretation with comparable overall test performance, as fewer cases were allocated to the intermediate risk group. The established cut-off of ≥2 can be maintained for the ERS, whereas it must be adjusted for the ES when determining the Aβ42/Aβ40 ratio.

Indexed as

Alzheimer DiseaseAmyloid beta-PeptidesBiomarkersHumansPeptide Fragmentstau ProteinsAmyloid beta-PeptidesBiomarkersPeptide Fragmentstau ProteinsAlzheimer’s diseasedementia riskErlangen Scorelongitudinal studyneuropsychological trajectories

Identifiers

PMID37742651
PMCPMC10657695
OpenAlexW4386955540

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.