Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38856858›Full record

ReviewCurrent psychiatry reports2024

Management of MCI in the Outpatient Setting.

Amy Abramowitz, Michael Weber

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Current psychiatry reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

2 authors.

Amy AbramowitzUNC School of Medicine and UNC Hospitals, Chapel Hill, NC, USA. amy_abramowitz@med.unc.edu.
Michael WeberUNC School of Medicine and UNC Hospitals, Chapel Hill, NC, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purpose of reviewWe review current literature related to the clinical assessment of Mild Cognitive Impairment (MCI). We compile recommendations related to the evaluation of MCI and examine literature regarding the use of clinical biomarkers in this assessment, the role of non-pharmacologic therapy in the prevention of cognitive decline, and recent approval of anti-amyloid therapy in the treatment of MCI. RECENT

findingsThe role of imaging and plasma biomarkers in the clinical assessment of MCI has expanded. There is data that non-pharmacologic therapy may have a role in the prevention of neurocognitive decline. Anti-amyloid therapies have recently been approved for clinical use. Clinical assessment of MCI remains multifactorial and includes screening and treating for underlying psychiatric and medical co-morbidities. The use of biomarkers in clinical settings is expanding with the rise of anti-amyloid therapies. These new diagnostics and therapeutics require nuanced discussion of risks and benefits. Psychiatrist's skillset is uniquely suited for these complex evaluations.

Indexed as

Cognitive DysfunctionAmbulatory CareBiomarkersHumansOutpatientsBiomarkersAlzheimer’s dementiaAnti-amyloid therapyDementia biomarkersMild cognitive impairment

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.