ArticleBiomolecules & biomedicine2026
Structural MRI phenotyping in Alzheimer's disease: Comparison of visual rating scales, volumetry, and cortical thickness in a Serbian single-centre cohort.
Article in Biomolecules & biomedicine, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Alzheimer's disease (AD) is characterized by a heterogeneous clinical course, and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-based phenotyping has increasingly been utilized to elucidate this variability. The literature recognizes four predominant MRI phenotypes: typical, hippocampal-sparing, limbic-predominant, and minimal-atrophy. However, the compatibility of various MRI phenotyping methods remains insufficiently defined. This study aimed to assess the concordance between MRI phenotyping methods within a Serbian cohort consisting of 40 subjects. Four MRI phenotyping approaches were employed: scale-based, adjusted scale-based, volume-based, and thickness-based. The scale-based method exhibited moderate agreement with the adjusted scale-based approach and high concordance with volumetric methods. In contrast, the relationship between scale- and thickness-based phenotyping was less clear. The lack of significant agreement with demographic variables, along with the observed differences across clinical dementia rating (CDR) domains, further underscored the clinical heterogeneity among phenotypes. Overall, these findings suggest that visual scale-based MRI phenotyping may serve as a practical approach in resource-limited clinical settings where advanced methods are unavailable. However, the results must be interpreted with caution and require validation in larger independent cohorts. Further research is necessary to clarify the relationship between scale- and thickness-based phenotyping across different disease stages and to investigate discrepancies in demographic, apolipoprotein E (APOE)-related, and clinical phenotype patterns in this Serbian sample compared to other populations.
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.