Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41804465›Full record

ReviewAlzheimer's & dementia (Amsterdam, Netherlands)

Exploring neuropsychiatric and behavioral symptoms, and social cognitive deficits in the differential diagnosis of behavioral variant of frontotemporal dementia and primary psychiatric disorders: A systematic literature review.

Femke G van Dijk, Linde Assendelft, Esther van den Berg, Lize C Jiskoot

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Alzheimer's & dementia (Amsterdam, Netherlands). The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Femke G van DijkDepartment of Neurology and Alzheimer Centre Erasmus MC Erasmus MC University Medical Centre Rotterdam the Netherlands.
Linde AssendelftDepartment of Neurology and Alzheimer Centre Erasmus MC Erasmus MC University Medical Centre Rotterdam the Netherlands.
Esther van den BergDepartment of Neurology and Alzheimer Centre Erasmus MC Erasmus MC University Medical Centre Rotterdam the Netherlands.
Lize C JiskootDepartment of Neurology and Alzheimer Centre Erasmus MC Erasmus MC University Medical Centre Rotterdam the Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The clinical overlap between behavioral variant frontotemporal dementia (bvFTD) and primary psychiatric disorders (PPD) often results in delayed and incorrect diagnoses. We performed a literature review of 16 studies to evaluate how neuropsychiatric, behavioral, and social cognitive symptoms can aid in distinguishing bvFTD from PPD during early clinical assessment. Our study revealed differences in symptom profile and trajectory in the two diseases. Apathy, disinhibition, and compulsions were more likely to progress in bvFTD, while often remaining stable or improving in PPD. Changes in eating behavior and inappropriate social conduct, and emotion recognition, socioemotional sensitivity, and theory-of-mind impairments were more severe in bvFTD than in PPD. Although differential diagnosis can be challenging, studying the profile and progression of neuropsychiatric, behavioral, and social cognitive symptoms in bvFTD and PDD offers valuable diagnostic clues. Implementing structured tools and targeted assessments may improve differential diagnosis, ultimately guiding more appropriate treatment strategies.

Indexed as

behavioral changebehavioral variant frontotemporal dementiadifferential diagnosisprimary psychiatric disorderssocial cognition

Identifiers

PMID41804465
PMCPMC12967533

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.