Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39740107›Full record

ArticleAlzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association2025

Facing the new diagnostic and treatment options of Alzheimer's disease: The necessity of informed consent.

Jonas Karneboge, Julia Haberstroh, Katharina Geschke, Julia Perry, Katrin Radenbach, Frank Jessen, Ayda Rostamzadeh

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Guideline
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Facing the new diagnostic and treatment options of Alzheimer's disease: The necessity of informed consent.Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association · 2025
    Article
  5. Article
  6. 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

7 authors.

Jonas KarnebogeDepartment of Psychology, University of Siegen, Siegen, Germany.ORCID 0009-0000-9272-6535
Julia HaberstrohDepartment of Psychology, University of Siegen, Siegen, Germany.ORCID 0000-0003-3133-011X
Katharina GeschkeDepartment of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, University Medical Center, Johannes Gutenberg-University Mainz, Mainz, Germany.ORCID 0000-0001-7311-0049
Julia PerryDepartment of Medical Ethics and History of Medicine, University Medical Center Goettingen, Goettingen, Germany.ORCID 0000-0001-8112-0298
Katrin RadenbachDepartment of Geriatric Psychiatry, Ökumenisches Hainich Klinikum gGmbH, Mühlhausen, Germany.ORCID 0009-0005-2409-6582
Frank JessenDepartment of Psychiatry, University of Cologne, Medical Faculty, Cologne, Germany.ORCID 0000-0003-1067-2102
Ayda RostamzadehDepartment of Psychiatry, University of Cologne, Medical Faculty, Cologne, Germany.ORCID 0000-0001-5189-134X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

With advances in biomarker-based detection of Alzheimer's disease (AD) and new treatment options with disease-modifying treatments (DMTs), we are heading toward a new conceptualization of diagnostics and therapy in the early stages of AD. Yet consensus guidelines on best clinical practices in predictive AD diagnostics are still developing. Currently, there is a knowledge gap regarding counseling and disclosure practices in early symptomatic disease stages, its implications for dementia risk estimation, and DMTs with associated risks and benefits. The crucial feature is the capacity of patients with (mild) cognitive impairment, eligible for DMTs, to consent. This perspective aims to (1) discuss the current challenges in assessing capacity to consent and (2) highlight the importance of a supported (informed) decision-making process. Measures to facilitate informed decision-making of patients constitute an ethical approach to enhancing the quality of care in this evolving therapeutic landscape. HIGHLIGHTS: This perspective: Explores biomarker-based early symptomatic AD detection and the implications for patient care. Emphasizes supported decision-making in DMTs for MCI and dementia patients. Discusses the need for standardized tools to assess the capacity to consent. Aligns diagnostic and treatment approaches with ethical care standards. Enhances patient autonomy in the evolving AD therapeutic landscape.

Indexed as

Alzheimer DiseaseDecision MakingInformed ConsentBiomarkersCognitive DysfunctionHumansMental CompetencyBiomarkersanti‐amyloid therapybiomarkerscapacity to consentcommunicationdementia risk estimationearly diagnosisinformed consentsupported decision‐making

Identifiers

PMID39740107
PMCPMC11772727

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.