ArticleThe journal of prevention of Alzheimer's disease2024
Estimating Socio-Economic Status for Alzheimer's Disease Trials.
Article in The journal of prevention of Alzheimer's disease, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Theoretical and practical challenges for capturing reserve and resilience in aging and Alzheimer's disease: A narrative review.Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association · 2026Review
- Elevated AD biomarkers do not explain cognitive performance in a community-recruited clinical trial cohort.Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association · 2026Article
- The Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative-4 (ADNI-4) Engagement Core: A culturally informed, community-engaged research (CI-CER) model to advance brain health equity.Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association · 2024Article
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.
Funding
Abstract
introductionMetrics of a participant's socioeconomic status (SES) are not routinely collected or standardized in clinical trials. This omission limits the ability to evaluate the generalizability of trial results and restricts clinicians from confidently interpreting the efficacy of new treatments across important sub-populations.
methodsWe adapted an SES measure of social disparity; the Hollingshead Two Factor Index of Social Position, which combines education and occupation into a single metric. We modernized the 1965 occupations to reflect the 2017 careers tabulated by the US Bureau of Labor Statistics. We currently use this adapted measure in Alzheimer's Clinical Trials Consortium studies.
resultsWe present the revised table of occupations. We found that the collection of SES data using the modified Hollingshead was feasible in a multi-site clinical trial and scores were distributed across all SES strata. DISCUSSION: The modified Hollingshead provides a standardized method for collecting SES information, enabling data aggregation, monitoring, and reporting.
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.