ArticleArquivos de neuro-psiquiatria2025
Diagnosing preclinical and clinical Alzheimer's disease with visual atrophy scales in the clinical practice.
Article in Arquivos de neuro-psiquiatria, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Advances in AI-based diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease using MRI: a comprehensive survey.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Review
- The relevance of magnetic resonance imaging in the era of Alzheimer's disease biomarkers.Arquivos de neuro-psiquiatria · 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundVisual atrophy scales from the medial temporal region are auxiliary biomarkers of neurodegeneration in Alzheimer's disease (AD). Therefore, they may correlate with progression from cognitively unimpaired (CU) status to mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and AD, and they become a valuable tool for diagnostic accuracy.
objectiveTo compare the medial temporal lobe atrophy (MTA) and entorhinal cortex atrophy (ERICA) scores measured through magnetic resonance image (MRI) scans as a useful method for probable AD diagnosis regarding clinical diagnosis and amyloid positron-emission tomography (PET).
methodsTwo neurologists blinded to the diagnoses classified 113 older adults (age > 65 years) through the MTA and ERICA scores. We investigated the correlations involving these scores and sociodemographic data, amyloid brain cortical burden measured through PET imaging with (11)C-labeled Pittsburgh Compound-B (11C-PIB PET), and clinical cognitive status, in individuals diagnosed as CU (CU;
resultsThe inter-rater reliability of the atrophy scales was excellent (0.8-1) according to the Cohen analysis. The CU group presented lower MTA scores (median value: 0) than ERICA (median value: 1) scores in both hemispheres. The 11C-PIB-PET was positive in 45% of the sample. In the MCI and AD groups, the ERICA score presented greater sensitivity, and the MTA score presented greater specificity. The accuracy of the clinical diagnosis was sufficient and no more than 70% for both scores in AD.
conclusionIn the present study, we found moderate sensitivity for the ERICA score, which could be a better screening tool than the MTA score for the diagnosis of AD or MCI. However, none of the scores were useful imaging biomarkers in preclinical AD.
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.