SynthesisBrain and behavior2024
Comparative Diagnostic Performance of Amyloid-β Positron Emission Tomography and Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Alzheimer's Disease: A Head-to-Head Meta-Analysis.
Synthesis in Brain and behavior, 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.
- Review
- Differentiating Early Alzheimer's Disease from MCI Using Comprehensive Semiquantitative Parameters in Dual-Phase Amyloid PET: A Pilot Study.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2026Article
- The Ability of Electroencephalography Using Statistical Pattern Recognition to Predict Conversion from Subtypes of Mild Cognitive Impairment to Dementia: A 5-Year Follow-Up Study.Dementia and geriatric cognitive disorders · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThis meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the comparative diagnostic performance of amyloid-β positron emission tomography (Aβ PET) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in diagnosing Alzheimer's disease (AD).
methodsAn extensive search was conducted in the PubMed and Embase databases to identify available publications up to December 2023. Head-to-head comparative studies were included if they evaluated the diagnostic performance of Aβ PET and MRI in diagnosing Alzheimer's disease. Sensitivity and specificity were assessed using the DerSimonian and Laird method, followed by transformation via the Freeman-Tukey double inverse sine transformation.
resultsSix articles involving 560 patients were included in the meta-analysis. When distinguishing AD from mild cognitive impairment (MCI), both methods showed comparable sensitivity (Aβ PET: 0.71, MRI: 0.62) and specificity (Aβ PET: 0.68, MRI: 0.69), with no statistically significant differences observed (p = 0.34 and 0.99). When identifying AD from normal cognitive control (NC), both Aβ PET and MRI showed similar results, with comparable sensitivity (Aβ PET: 0.93, MRI: 0.85) and specificity (Aβ PET: 0.95, MRI: 0.82), without significant differences (p = 0.38 and 0.19). Similarly, in detecting MCI from NC, both Aβ PET and MRI demonstrated similar sensitivity (Aβ PET: 0.69, MRI: 0.64) and specificity (Aβ PET: 0.75, MRI: 0.76) without significant differences (p = 0.40 and 0.94). However, 18F-FMM seems to have a higher specificity compared to MRI when distinguishing AD from MCI (P = 0.03) and AD from NC (p = 0.04).
conclusionsOur meta-analysis indicates that Aβ PET demonstrates similar sensitivity and specificity to MRI in diagnosing Alzheimer's disease. However, the limited number of studies may impact the evidence of the current study; further larger sample prospective research is required to confirm these findings.
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.