ArticleJournal of Alzheimer's disease : JAD2025
Validation of a novel neuroimaging signature for dementia and clinical Alzheimer's disease in the population-based Rotterdam study.
Article in Journal of Alzheimer's disease : JAD, 2025. 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.
- Test-retest reliability of FreeSurfer measures of neurodegeneration.NeuroImage · 2026Article
- Cerebral oxygen extraction fraction as an emerging imaging biomarker in mild cognitive impairment and dementia.Dementia & neuropsychologia · 2026Review
- IoMT driven Alzheimer's prediction model empowered with transfer learning and explainable AI approach in healthcare 5.0.Scientific reports · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BackgroundA novel neuroimaging signature of regional cortical thickness on brain MRI recently showed high potential for Alzheimer's disease and related dementias (ADRD) risk stratification in the community. How these findings translate to other populations, remains undetermined.ObjectiveWe aimed to replicate this novel ADRD neuroimaging marker in the population-based Rotterdam Study.MethodsWe included all participants from the population-based Rotterdam Study with brain-MRI between 2005-2016, and derived the signature using FreeSurfer. We computed hazard ratios and C-statistics for 10-year dementia risk, and betas for cross-sectional associations with cognition, comparing the novel signature to hippocampal volume, mean cortical thickness, and another cortical thickness signature (Dickerson's).ResultsOf 3249 participants (mean age 71.3 ± 8.0 years), 294 developed dementia (74.8% clinical AD) during a mean follow-up of 8.1 years. The novel ADRD signature had similar magnitude of associations as Dickerson's signature and cortical thickness for AD dementia (HR per 1-SD increase 0.87;0.78-0.96), but performed worse than all markers for all-cause dementia. Of the four neuroimaging markers, hippocampal volume showed the strongest associations with both risk of all-cause dementia and clinical AD dementia. The ADRD had the weakest association with general cognitive function (β per 1-SD increase 0.04;0.02-0.06), and executive function (β per 1-SD increase 0.02;0.00-0.04), followed by cortical thickness and Dickerson's, and hippocampal volume showed the strongest associations.ConclusionsIn this community-based study, the novel cortical thickness signature did not outperform hippocampal volume for dementia risk stratification. The importance of replication studies underlines the value of the current study. Replicating research findings is essential to establish robust biomarkers for dementia risk prediction.
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.