ReviewBrain communications2023
Online clinical tools to support the use of new plasma biomarker diagnostic technology in the assessment of Alzheimer's disease: a narrative review.
Review in Brain communications, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Factors influencing implementation of an Alzheimer's disease blood test among UK old age psychiatrists: mixed-methods study using the theoretical domains framework.Age and ageing · 2026Article
- Network pharmacology approach to unravel the neuroprotective potential of natural products: a narrative review.Molecular diversity · 2026Review
- Cut-points and gray zones: The challenges of integrating Alzheimer's disease plasma biomarkers into clinical practice.Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association · 2025Review
- Computerized decision support to optimally funnel patients through the diagnostic pathway for dementia.Alzheimer's research & therapy · 2024Article
- Body Composition and Alzheimer's Disease: A Holistic Review.International journal of molecular sciences · 2024Review
- Perceptions of the use of biomarkers for Alzheimer's disease diagnosis: A systematic review and synthesis of the qualitative literature.Alzheimer's & dementia (Amsterdam, Netherlands)Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Recent advances in new diagnostic technologies for Alzheimer's disease have improved the speed and precision of diagnosis. However, accessing the potential benefits of this technology poses challenges for clinicians, such as deciding whether it is clinically appropriate to order a diagnostic test, which specific test or tests to order and how to interpret test results and communicate these to the patient and their caregiver. Tools to support decision-making could provide additional structure and information to the clinical assessment process. These tools could be accessed online, and such 'e-tools' can provide an interactive interface to support patients and clinicians in the use of new diagnostic technologies for Alzheimer's disease. We performed a narrative review of the literature to synthesize information available on this research topic. Relevant studies that provide an understanding of how these online tools could be used to optimize the clinical utility of diagnostic technology were identified. Based on these, we discuss the ways in which e-tools have been used to assist in the diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease and propose recommendations for future research to aid further development.
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.