ArticleNeurology. Clinical practice2025
Management of Patients With Mild Cognitive Impairment in the Era of Anti-Amyloid Therapy: A Worldwide Neurology Survey.
Article in Neurology. Clinical practice, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Background and Objectives: The aim of this study was to explore practice patterns in managing mild cognitive impairment (MCI). The investigation and management of MCI is considered important because it offers the opportunity to potentially stave off conversion to dementia. However, there are few data on current practices/approaches in this area, especially worldwide; such data can help identify potential disparities and anticipate adoption of new therapies. Methods: We performed a worldwide electronic survey of neurology practitioners through the Practice Current section of Results: We received 1,257 responses from 95 countries, including 237 cognitive subspecialists and 464 respondents from low-/middle-income countries. On multivariable analysis, cognitive subspecialists were more likely than other practitioners to investigate MCI with a lumbar puncture (aOR 1.90, 95% CI 1.32-2.73), luorodeoxyglucose-PET (FDG-PET) (aOR 1.45, 95% CI 1.00-2.10) and to offer pharmacotherapy if investigations suggested neurodegeneration (aOR 1.92, 95% CI 1.29-2.85). Regionally, respondents from Europe, Latin America, and Asia were more likely than those from the United States/Canada to order FDG-PET (e.g., Europe: aOR 2.38, 95% CI 1.29-4.39) and amyloid PET (Europe: aOR 3.30, 95% CI 1.85-5.87), controlling for reported access to these tests. Pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic approaches were comparable between cognitive subspecialists and other respondents. Despite concerns about safety (77.1% expressed being somewhat or very concerned), attitudes toward prescribing new anti-amyloid agents were similar among all respondents, reflecting a generally favorable attitude (e.g., 62% would prescribe anti-amyloid therapy if it was available). Discussion: Our results highlight practice differences among cognitive subspecialists and other practitioners worldwide in the management of MCI. Attitudes toward anti-amyloid therapy indicate cautious optimism, with concerns about side effects but a general interest to prescribe.
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.