ArticleJournal of Alzheimer's disease : JAD2026
A qualitative study investigating clinician experiences with lecanemab implementation across seven academic medical centers.
Article in Journal of Alzheimer's disease : JAD, 2026. 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
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
BackgroundThe recent approval of anti-amyloid therapies (AATs) for Alzheimer's disease (AD) has introduced new complexities into clinical care. While offering therapeutic promise, AATs necessitate changes in practice models, infrastructure, and team responsibilities. Understanding clinician and system-level adaptations is critical to guide implementation.ObjectiveTo explore how clinicians adjust clinical workflows and care processes when integrating anti-amyloid treatments into AD management.MethodsWe conducted semi-structured interviews with neurology and geriatrics clinicians across seven academic medical centers to explore perspectives on AAT implementation. An interdisciplinary team used hybrid deductive-inductive coding and thematic analysis to identify themes.ResultsTwenty-seven clinicians (17 neurology, 10 geriatrics) participated. Three themes emerged: (1) Structural adaptations: Sites developed governance committees, eligibility protocols, and workflows for referrals, administration, and monitoring. Some hired new staff, and protocols evolved with experience. (2) Diagnostic shifts: Clinicians reported heightened pressure for earlier, more precise diagnoses, prompting greater biomarker use and structured disclosure visits incorporating treatment discussions. (3) Cultural change: While clinicians described optimism about disease-modifying therapies, they expressed ethical concerns about resource allocation, over-medicalization of early dementia, and diversion of resources from broader dementia care.ConclusionsThe findings reflect evolving institutional protocols, clinical roles and responsibilities, and ethical tensions within the clinical workforce in response to AAT administration and access to early diagnosis and treatment.
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.