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.
0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it
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.
2 · The registry
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.
Melanie A MatyiRichards Medical Laboratories Penn Frontotemporal Degeneration Center Department of Neurology School of Medicine University of Pennsylvania Philadelphia Pennsylvania USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4623-2080
Emma RhodesRichards Medical Laboratories Penn Frontotemporal Degeneration Center Department of Neurology School of Medicine University of Pennsylvania Philadelphia Pennsylvania USA.
Sheina EmraniRichards Medical Laboratories Penn Frontotemporal Degeneration Center Department of Neurology School of Medicine University of Pennsylvania Philadelphia Pennsylvania USA.
Hannah A JinRichards Medical Laboratories Penn Frontotemporal Degeneration Center Department of Neurology School of Medicine University of Pennsylvania Philadelphia Pennsylvania USA.
David J IrwinRichards Medical Laboratories Penn Frontotemporal Degeneration Center Department of Neurology School of Medicine University of Pennsylvania Philadelphia Pennsylvania USA.
Corey T McMillanRichards Medical Laboratories Penn Frontotemporal Degeneration Center Department of Neurology School of Medicine University of Pennsylvania Philadelphia Pennsylvania USA.
Lauren MassimoRichards Medical Laboratories Penn Frontotemporal Degeneration Center Department of Neurology School of Medicine University of Pennsylvania Philadelphia Pennsylvania USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3407-7335
Funding
National Alzheimer's Coordinating CenterU24AG072122 · NIA · UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON · PI STEPHENS, KARI A · 2021 to 2025
$45.8M
Research Education ComponentP30AG062422 · NIA · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN FRANCISCO · PI Katherine P Rankin · 2019 to 2026
$36.9M
Research Education ComponentP30AG062421 · NIA · MASSACHUSETTS GENERAL HOSPITAL · PI BRADFORD C DICKERSON · 2019 to 2026
$36.5M
UCSD Shiley-Marcos Alzheimer's Disease Research Center P30P30AG062429 · NIA · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN DIEGO · PI DOUGLAS R GALASKO · 2019 to 2026
$34.9M
Wisconsin Alzheimer's Disease Research CenterP30AG062715 · NIA · UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN-MADISON · PI Sanjay Asthana · 2019 to 2026
$34.5M
Research Education ComponentP30AG062677 · NIA · MAYO CLINIC ROCHESTER · PI KEJAL KANTARCI · 2019 to 2026
$33.5M
Research Education ComponentP30AG066514 · NIA · ICAHN SCHOOL OF MEDICINE AT MOUNT SINAI · PI Margaret Sewell · 2020 to 2026
$31.0M
Yale Alzheimer Disease Research CenterP30AG066508 · NIA · YALE UNIVERSITY · PI STEPHEN M STRITTMATTER · 2020 to 2026
$30.2M
Research Education CoreP30AG066462 · NIA · COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY HEALTH SCIENCES · PI PHILIP L DE JAGER · 2020 to 2026
$30.1M
Research Education ComponentP30AG066468 · NIA · UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH AT PITTSBURGH · PI C. Elizabeth Shaaban · 2020 to 2026
$29.4M
Research Education ComponentP30AG066507 · NIA · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI Corinne Pettigrew · 2020 to 2026
$29.3M
University of Washington Alzheimer's Disease Research CenterP30AG066509 · NIA · UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON · PI Amanda D. Boyd · 2020 to 2026
backgroundRacial and/or ethnic differences in neuropsychological test performance are understudied in frontotemporal degeneration (FTD) but their identification is critical to identifying ways to improve care of representative FTD populations.
methodsDifferences in cognitive scores between Black (
resultsMinoritized individuals had lower scores and/or greater likelihood of impairment on measures of lexical retrieval, processing speed, cognitive flexibility, and working memory but not global cognition, verbal recall, attention, and category fluency. Addition of severity, age ( DISCUSSION: Racial/ethnic differences on neuropsychological tests used in diagnosis and monitoring of FTD were substantially attenuated when accounting for potential contributing factors. To address these differences in FTD, future efforts must increase representative research participation of patients and understand social determinants of health. Highlights: Racially/ethnically minoritized individuals with frontotemporal dementia are severely underrepresented in the National Alzheimer's Coordinating Center datasetRacially/ethnically minoritized individuals with frontotemporal dementia obtained lower scores and greater likelihood of impairment on common neuropsychological testsThe effect of racial/ethnic group on neuropsychological test scores was substantially attenuated when adjusting for disease severity, education level, sex, and age.
Indexed as
cognitionfrontotemporal degenerationminoritized groups
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.
Racial/ethnic differences in neuropsychological test performance in frontotemporal degeneration. · full record | OpenQuestion