ReviewQuantitative imaging in medicine and surgery2025
Quantitative magnetic resonance imaging in Alzheimer's disease: a narrative review.
Review in Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- T1 mapping in Alzheimer's disease: a quantitative MRI study with amyloid-PET correlation.European radiology experimental · 2026Article
- Assessing Microstructural and Molecular Brain Changes in Early Cognitive Decline Using Multiparametric 3T Magnetic Resonance Imaging.Neurology international · 2026Article
- Functional Pathological Features and Molecular Markers in Alzheimer's Disease.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Review
- Skull-stripping induces shortcut learning in MRI-based Alzheimer's disease classification.Insights into imaging · 2025Article
- A combination of ketones and NADAlzheimer's & dementia (New York, N. Y.)Article
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
Abstract
Background and Objective: Alzheimer's disease (AD) is a complex neurodegenerative disorder characterized by progressive cognitive decline and is traditionally associated with grey matter pathology. Recent research highlights the significance of white matter and myelin damage in AD, presenting a paradigm shift in understanding the disease. The aim of this study was to summarize current advancements in magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) techniques and their applications in assessing myelin and brain pathology in AD with a special focus on ultrashort echo time (UTE) based techniques, alongside the role of artificial intelligence (AI) in enhancing diagnostic accuracy. Methods: Between April and May 2024, we conducted a literature search using Google Scholar, Web of Science, and PubMed, focusing on publications from 1990 to 2024. Search terms included "Quantitative imaging", "Alzheimer's MRI", "T1ρ Alzheimer's", "MT imaging Alzheimer's", and "myelin water fraction Alzheimer's". We included quantitative MRI studies involving AD brains and excluded volumetric analyses, non-quantitative studies, non-English reports, non-peer-reviewed studies, and animal research. Key Content and Findings: Quantitative MRI techniques, including T1, T1ρ, magnetization transfer ratio (MTR), T2, T2*, susceptibility, myelin water fraction (MWF), and non-aqueous myelin proton density (PD) were described. These biomarkers represent different pathophysiological elements of brain damage and may have distinct functions at different phases of the disease. The role of AI in enhancing diagnostic accuracy is also discussed. Conclusions: In conclusion, integrating advanced MRI techniques and AI offers promising avenues for understanding and diagnosing AD. The focus on myelin damage and white matter integrity underscores the importance of comprehensive imaging approaches. Continued research and development are essential to address current challenges and improve clinical practice in AD diagnostics.
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.