ArticleJournal of Alzheimer's disease : JAD2024
Reactions of clinical neuropsychologists to the Alzheimer's Association workgroup's draft diagnostic and staging criteria for Alzheimer's disease.
Article in Journal of Alzheimer's disease : JAD, 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.
- Subjective Cognitive Concerns and Cognitive Trajectories in Parkinson's Disease: Biomarker Impact.Annals of clinical and translational neurology · 2026Article
- Multimodal biomarker characterization of amnestic objective subtle cognitive decline in aging and preclinical Alzheimer's disease.The journal of prevention of Alzheimer's disease · 2026Observational
- Time to align sensitive cognitive assessment with protein biomarkers in Alzheimer's disease.Journal of neuropsychology · 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
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundAn Alzheimer's Association (AA) workgroup published criteria for the diagnosis and staging of Alzheimer's disease (AD). To date, there have not been empirical investigations of professionals' opinions regarding the AA criteria for AD.
objectiveOur goal was to survey clinical neuropsychologists with expertise in dementia about these criteria.
methodsParticipants were recruited from a professional interest group of neuropsychologists focused on dementia. They rated their agreement with 15 statements about the AA draft criteria for AD prior to publication of the final version. The 15 statements were rated on a 4-point Likert scale ranging from 1 = Strongly Disagree to 4 = Strongly Agree.
resultsSixty-one respondents provided analyzable data. When all 15 statements were coded such that higher values suggested more concern about the recommendations, the mean rating was 3.12 (
conclusionsOpinions of neuropsychologists suggest the need for important revisions or additions to the AA criteria for AD, including a clearer statement of purpose and more guidance on practical implementation.
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.