ArticleAlzheimer's & dementia (Amsterdam, Netherlands)
Referral patterns and diagnostic outcomes in an outpatient Australian tertiary cognitive neurology service: 2009-2019.
Article in Alzheimer's & dementia (Amsterdam, Netherlands). 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.
- Neurofilament light chain and voice acoustics in dementia diagnosis (NAVAIDD): Protocol for a cohort study assessing the real-world diagnostic utility of blood and digital biomarkers in clinical settings.Journal of Alzheimer's disease reportsTrial
- Complex atypical caregiving: navigating the margins of unique caregiver roles and burdens.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Article
- Referral patterns and diagnostic outcomes in an outpatient Australian tertiary cognitive neurology service: 2009-2019.Alzheimer's & dementia (Amsterdam, Netherlands)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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Young-onset dementia (YOD) and atypical dementias often experience diagnostic delays, particularly in outpatient settings where timely referrals are crucial. Methods: A 10-year retrospective audit (2009-2019) of 626 patients at a specialist cognitive neurology clinic reviewed demographics, referral sources, and time to diagnosis. Data were compared between YOD and late-onset dementia (LOD), and with and without dementia groups. Results: Fifty-three percent of patients were diagnosed with dementia (mean age: 65 ± 11.9 years). Non-neurodegenerative conditions were more frequent in < 65 years (61%). Among YOD cases, Alzheimer's dementia (AD) and behavioral variant frontotemporal dementia accounted for 40% and 34% of diagnoses, respectively, while AD predominated in LOD (65%). Language-variant dementias were similar between groups (14%). Diagnostic delays in YOD averaged 1 year longer than in LOD. Discussion: Higher YOD and language-variant dementia referrals to specialist services reveal diagnostic delays, underscoring the need for better referral and diagnostic pathways. Highlights: Delayed diagnosis common in young-onset dementia (YOD) and atypical dementia.Specialist clinics see more YOD and language-variant dementia referrals.YOD has longer time from symptom onset to diagnosis compared to late-onset cases.Behavioral variant frontotemporal dementia (bvFTD) a more common diagnosis in YOD patients.
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.